Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
I
THE CONSTITUTION (FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 19511
21
22
Legislative History
The Constitution (First Amendment) Bill, 1951 was introduced in
Parliament (Provisional) on 12 May 19512. The Bill sought to: (i) amend
articles 15, 19, 85, 87, 174, 176, 341, 342, 372 and 376 of the
Constitution and (ii) insert new articles 31A, 31B and Ninth Schedule
in the Constitution. On a motion moved in the House on 16 May and
adopted on 18 May 1951, the Bill was referred to a Select Committee3.
The Report of the Select Committee was presented to the House on
25 May 19514. The Committee suggested amendments in some of the
clauses of the Bill, as introduced in the House.
The Bill, as reported by the Select Committee, was considered by
the House on 29, 30 and 31 May and 1 and 2 June and, with some
modifications, passed on 2 June 19515.
2
3
4
5
23
Amendment of Article 15
Clauses (1) and (2) of article 15 prohibit discrimination against
citizens on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
Clause (3) of the article, however, provides: Nothing in this article
shall prevent the State from making any special provisions for women
and children. Clause 2 of the Constitution (First Amendment) Bill, as
introduced, sought to amplify the scope of clause (3) of article 15 by
adding at its end the words or for the educational, economic or social
advancement of any backward classes of citizens so that any special
provision that the State may make for the advancement of these classes
may not be challenged on the ground of being discriminatory. The
Select Committee while agreeing with the principle underlying the
proposed amendment considered that the scope of the amendment should
be extended to cover article 29(2)8 as well. The Committee, accordingly,
modified clause (2) of the Bill so as to add a new clause (4) to
article 15. The amendment was adopted by the House on 1 June 1951,
and thus clause (4) was added to article 159.
Amendment of Article 19
The Bill sought to amend, inter alia, article 19 (2) which specifies
the grounds on which restrictions might be placed on the freedom of
speech guaranteed under clause (1)(a) of that article.
Clause 3 (1)(a) of the Bill, as introduced, proposed that in
article 19 for clause (2), the following clause shall be substituted and
6
7
8
The relevant clauses of the Bill were clauses 6, 8, 10, 11 and 12.
Parl. Deb., 2 June 1951, cc. 9966, 9974, 9982, 9986, 10016.
Article 29(2) provides No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational
institution maintained by the state or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds
only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them.
Parl. Deb., 1 June 1951, cc. 9836-9837. For text of new clause (4) of article 15,
see the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 in Annexure A.
24
Parl. Deb., 1 June 1951, cc. 9839, 9879. For text of article 19 (2), as so
amended and adopted, see the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 in
Annexure (A).
25
Ibid., c. 9888.
Ibid.
26
proviso to the clause on the lines of clause (3) of article 31. According
to the proviso, the protection of the proposed new article 31A would
be available to a State Law and only if such law having been reserved
for the consideration of the President had received his assent.
The Select Committee also amended the definition of the expression
estate in clause (2)(a) of the proposed new article 31A so as to cover
the local equivalent of estate in the existing laws relating to land
tenures which were in a regional language. Clause (2)(a), as amended
by the Committee, read, the expression estate shall, in relation to
any local area, have the same meaning as that expression or its local
equivalent has, in the existing law relating to land tenures in force in
that area.
When clause 4 of the Bill, seeking insertion of new article 31A,
was considered by the House on 1 June 1951, the Minister of Law,
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, moved an amendment that at the end of
clause (2)(a) of the proposed new article (as modified by the Select
Committee), after the word area the words and shall also include
any jagir, inam, or muafi or other similar grant be added. The
amendment was accepted. With this further amplification of the
definition of the expression estate, new article 31A, as reported by
the Select Committee, was adopted by Parliament (Provisional)13.
Clause 5 of the Bill proposed insertion of a new article 31B
providing for the validation of certain land reform measures which had
already been enacted by some of the States. These Acts were specified
in a new Schedule to the ConstitutionNinth Schedulewhich was
proposed to be added by clause 14 of the Bill. The Select Committee
suggested a verbal change in the last two lines of the proposed article
namely, the substitution of the words each of the said Acts shall
continue in force until altered or repealed by competent Legislatures
by the words each of the said Acts shall, subject to the power of any
competent Legislatures to repeal or amend it, continue in force.
Clause 5 of the Bill, as amended by the Select Committee, was
adopted by the House at the Second Reading stage14. However, at the
13
14
27
17
28
29
30
II
THE CONSTITUTION (SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 195220
Bill No. 54 of 1952; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Law and
Minority Affairs, Shri C.C. Biswas on 18 June 1952; Referred to Select
Committee; Report of the Committee presented: 18 November 1952; Debated,
Lok Sabha: 18 June, 8 and 9 July, 11 and 18 November, 9, 10 and 15 December,
1952; Rajya Sabha: 15, 18 and 19 December 1952; Presidents Assent: 1 May
1953; Date of Gazette Notification: 2 May 1953; Date of Commencement:
1 May 1953.
31
Legislative History
The Constitution (Second Amendment) Bill, 1952 was introduced
in the House of the People on 18 June 195221. The Bill sought to
amend article 81 of the Constitution. On a motion, moved in the House
on 11 November 1952 and adopted on the same day, the Bill was
referred to a Select Committee of the House22. The Report of the
Select Committee was presented to the House on 18 November 195223.
The Bill, as reported by the Select Committee, was considered by
the House of the People on 9, 10 and 15 December and passed on
21
22
23
32
Amendment of Article 81
The original article 81(1)(a) prescribed an absolute limit of
500 elected members in the House of the People. Article 81(1)(b) laid
down that the number of members to be allotted to each territorial
constituency shall be so determined as to ensure that there shall be
not less than one member for every 750,000 of the population and not
more than one member for every 500,000 of the population.
The 1951 Census figures showed that the population of the
constituencies had gone up in all cases. It was obvious that in some
constituencies the population would exceed the maximum limit of
750,000 which a single member could represent. In view of this and
the overall limit of 500 elected members prescribed in article 81(1)(a),
it was deemed necessary that article 81(1)(b) be amended relaxing the
limits prescribed therein.
Clause 2 of the Constitution (Second Amendment) Bill, as introduced
in the House, proposed that in sub-clause (b) of clause (1) of article 81,
for the figures 750,000 the figures 850,000 and for the figures
500,000 the figures 650,000 shall be substituted. The Select
Committee felt that although the proposed amendment would be
sufficient to solve the immediate difficulty, it was desirable to avoid
the necessity of amending article 81(1)(b) periodically after every
census. The Committee, therefore, suggested that the upper limit of
representation laid down in sub-clause (b) of article 81(1) be removed
altogether thereby bringing that article in line with article 170(2) relating
to representation in the State Assemblies. The Committee accordingly
substituted a new clause for the original clause 2 of the Bill.
Clause 2 of the Bill, as substituted by the Select Committee, was
adopted by the House of the People and the Council of States on 15
and 19 December 1952, respectively26.
24
25
26
33
III
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 195427
Bill No. 40 of 1954; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Commerce and
Industry, Shri T.T. Krishnamachari on 6 September 1954; Referred to Joint
Committee; Report of the Committee presented: 20 September 1954; Debated,
Lok Sabha: 6, 10, 11, 13, 20, 22 and 23 September 1954; Rajya Sabha: 15, 16,
24, 27 and 28 September 1954; Ratified as per requirement of proviso to article
368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures, namely, Bihar,
Madhya Pradesh, Madras, Patiala and East Punjab States Union, Punjab,
Rajasthan, Saurashtra and West Bengal; Presidents Assent: 22 February 1955;
Date of Gazette Notification: 22 February 1955; Date of Commencement:
22 February 1955.
33
34
short supply in the sense that our own production was not sufficient for
our needs. Since jute goods were the most important item in our export
trade it was desirable that the Centre should have the power to control
the production, supply and distribution of raw jute.
The Bill accordingly proposed to amplify Entry 33 of List III in the
Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. Besides placing four classes of
essential commodities in that entry, it was proposed to include also
imported goods of the same kind as the products of centralised
industries, in order that the Centre might be in a position to exercise
full control over the development of such industries.
Legislative History
The Constitution (Third Amendment) Bill, 1954 was introduced in
the Lok Sabha (House of the People) on 6 September 195428. The Bill
sought to substitute a new entry for the original Entry 33 of List III in
the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. On a motion moved in the
Lok Sabha on 10 September, adopted on 13 September and concurred
in by the Rajya Sabha (Council of States) on 16 September 1954, the
Bill was referred to a Joint Committee29.
In its Report, presented to the Lok Sabha on 20 September 1954,
the Joint Committee approved the Bill, as introduced, subject to a
slight verbal change in clause (a) of the proposed Entry 3330.
The Bill as amended by the Joint Committee, was adopted by each
of the Houses without any further change. It was considered and adopted
by the Lok Sabha on 22 and 23 September and by the Rajya Sabha on
27 and 28 September 195431.
28
29
30
31
Lok Sabha Debates (hereinafter cited as L.S. Deb.), 6 September 1954, c. 1054.
L.S. Deb., 10 and 13 September 1954, cc. 1355, 1655 and 1666; Rajya Sabha
Debates (Hereinafter cited as R.S. Deb.), 16 September 1954, c. 2410.
The Committee suggested that in clause (a) of the proposed Entry 33, the words
the control of which be substituted by the words where the control of such
industry. For Entry 33 of List III, as substituted by the Constitution (Third
Amendment) Act, 1954, see Annexure (A).
L.S. Deb., 23 September 1954, cc. 2967, 2968 and 2977; R.S. Deb., 28 September
1954, cc. 3751, 3757.
35
IV
THE CONSTITUTION (FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 195532
36
37
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Bill, 1954 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 20 December 195434. The Bill sought to amend
articles 31, 31A, and 305 and the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution.
33
34
38
Amendment of Article 31
Clause 2 of the Bill, as introduced in the Lok Sabha, sought to
substitute clause (2) of article 3140 by the following clauses:
(2) No property shall be compulsorily acquired or requisitioned
by the State save for a public purpose and save by authority
of a law which provides for compensation for the property so
35
Ibid., 14 March 1955, c. 1943, 15 March 1955, cc. 2197, 2198; R.S. Deb.,
19 March 1955. c. 2520.
36
37
38
39
L.S. Deb., 12 April 1995, c. 5104; R.S. Deb., 20 April 1955, c. 5390.
40
39
L.S. Deb., 12 April 1955, c. 5085; R.S. Deb., 20 April 1955, c. 5348.
Article 31A was inserted by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. For
Text of the article as it stood prior to the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act,
see the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 in Annexure (A).
40
following clause shall be, and shall be deemed always to have been
substituted, namely:
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in article 13, no law
providing for:
(a) the acquisition by the State of any estate or of any rights
therein, or
(b) the extinguishment or modification of any rights in estates or
in agricultural holdings, or
(c) the maximum extent of agricultural land that may be owned
or occupied by any person and the disposal of any agricultural
land held in excess of such maximum, whether by transfer to
the State or otherwise, or
(d) the acquisition of requisitioning of any immovable property
for the relief or rehabilitation of persons displaced from their
original place of residence by reason of the setting up of the
Dominions of India and Pakistan, or
(e) the acquisition or requisitioning for a public purpose of any
land, buildings or huts declared in pursuance of law to
constitute a slum, or of any vacant on waste land, or
(f) the taking over of the management of any property by the
State for a limited period either in the public interest or in
order to secure the proper management of the property, or
(g) the transfer of any undertakings wholly or in part, from one
company to another or the amalgamation of two or more
companies either in the public interest or in order to secure
the proper management of the undertakings or of any of the
companies, or
(h) the extinguishment or modification of any rights of managing
agents, managing directors, managers or shareholders of
companies, or
(i) the extinguishment or modification of any rights accruing by
virtue of any agreement, lease or licence for the purpose of
41
42
cover statutory corporations as well as companies. In new subclause (d) [original sub-clause (h)], a reference to secretaries and
treasurers was included as their position was similar to that of managing
agents; so far as shareholders were concerned, the Committee considered
it sufficient to refer to their voting rights.
With the foregoing changes, clause 3 of the Bill (as amended by
the Joint Committee) read:
In article 31A of the Constitution:
(a) for clause (1), the following clause shall be, and shall be deemed
always to have been, substituted, namely:
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in article 13, no law
providing for:
(a) The acquisition by the State of any estate or of any rights
therein or the extinguishment or modification of any such
rights, or
(b) The taking over of the management of any property by the
State for a limited period either in the public interest or in
order to secure the proper management of the property, or
(c) The amalgamation of two or more corporations either in the
public interest or in order to secure the proper management of
any of the corporations, or
(d) the extinguishment or modification of any rights of managing
agents, secretaries, treasurers, managing directors or managers
of corporations, or of any voting rights of shareholders thereof,
or
(e) the extinguishment or modification of any rights accruing by
virtue of any agreement, lease or licence for the purpose of
searching for or winning, any mineral or mineral oil, or the
premature termination or cancellation of any such agreement,
lease or licence,
shall be deemed to be void on the ground that it is inconsistent
with, or takes away or abridges any of the rights conferred by
article 14, article 19 or article 31:
43
46
L.S. Deb., 12 April 1955, cc. 5025, 5027, 5071, 5072 and 5089.
R.S. Deb., 20 April 1955, c. 5377.
Article 301 guarantees freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse throughout
the territory of India.
Article 303 places certain restrictions on the legislative powers of Parliament
and State Legislatures with regard to trade and commerce.
44
49
50
51
52
The Joint Committee replaced the figures 1954 by the figures 1955.
Sub-clause 6 (ii) of article 19, as amended by the Constitution (First Amendment)
Act, permits legislation being made enabling the State to carry on any trade or
business, etc., to the exclusion, complete or partial of citizens or otherwise vide
the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. [For Text see Anenxure (A)]
L.S. Deb., 12 April 1955, c. 5059.
Ibid., and R.S. Deb., 20 April 1955, c. 5386.
L.S. Deb., 12 April 1955, cc. 5031, 5099.
Ibid., cc. 1503-1504; R.S. Deb., 20 April 1955, c. 5386.
45
46
V
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 195553
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act, 1955, when introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 9 December 1955, was titled as the Constitution
(Eighth Amendment) Bill, 195554. It sought to amend article 3 of the
Constitution, dealing with Parliaments power to provide by law for
the formation of new States and alternation of areas, boundaries or
names of existing States.
53
54
47
56
57
58
59
60
48
its views with respect to the Bill (for the purpose of forming new
States etc.) referred to it; and (2) to extend such period, if necessary.
The amendment lays down that no such Bill can be introduced in
Parliament until after the expiry of the prescribed or extended period.
VI
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 195661
49
50
51
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixth Amendment) Act, 1956, when introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 3 May 1956, was titled as the Constitution (Tenth
Amendment) Bill, 195664. It sought to amend articles 269, 286 and the
Seventh Schedule to the Constitution with a view to removing certain
anomalies with regard to taxes on inter-State sales and purchases. On
a motion, moved in the Lok Sabha on 9 May and adopted on the same
day, and concurred in by the Rajya Sabha on 16 May 1956, the Bill
was referred to a Joint Committee of the Houses of Parliament65.
The Report of the Joint Committee was presented to the Lok Sabha
on 23 May 195666. The Committee did not consider any amendment
in the Bill necessary and recommended that the Bill, as introduced in
the Lok Sabha, be passed.
The Bill, as introduced, was then considered and passed by the
Lok Sabha on 29 May 1956 with only a formal amendment moved by
the Minister of Finance, Shri C.D. Deshmukh, substituting the brackets
and words (Tenth Amendment) in clause 1 by the brackets and words
(Sixth Amendment). Clause 2 (seeking insertion of a new Entry 92A
64
65
66
52
68
53
VII
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 195669
54
55
such a Legislature, and that the enlarged Madhya Pradesh should also
be provided with one. Since the constitution of a Legislative Council
for Madhya Pradesh would necessarily take time, it was proposed to
bring the relevant amendment of article 168 (1) (a) into force from a
future date by means of a public notification of the President.
Clause 8.This sought to revise article 170 mainly with a view to
bringing it into line with articles 81 and 82 as revised by clause 4.
Clause 9.Under clause (1) of article 171, the maximum strength
of the Legislative Council of a State is fixed at one-fourth of the
strength of the Legislative Assembly of that State. Although in the
larger States, like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, this maximum was adequate,
it led to difficulties in the case of the smaller States. It was, therefore,
proposed to alter the maximum to one-third of the strength of the
Legislative Assembly.
Clause 10.Article 216 empowers the President to appoint to a
High Court as many judges as he may from time to time deem it
necessary and also to fix the maximum number of judges for each
High Court by a separate order. The proviso was of little significance
from the practical point of view, since the order fixing the maximum
might be changed by the President whenever necessary. The appointment
of additional and acting judges for which provision was sought to be
made in clause 14 would also involve either frequent modifications in
the order or a fixation of the maximum number at a high figure. It was
therefore, proposed to omit the proviso to article 216.
Clause 11.The amendment of clause (1) of article 217 proposed
in this clause was consequential on the proposal to provide for the
appointment of additional and acting judges for limited periods.
Clause 12.An important factor affecting the selection of
High Court judges from the bar is the total prohibition contained in
article 220 on practice after their retirement from the bench. It was
proposed to revise the article so as to relax this complete ban and
permit a retired judge to practise in the Supreme Court and in any
High Court other than the one in which he was a permanent judge.
56
57
58
respectively, as the High Courts for the enlarged new States with the
same names. Taking into account the level of income at the bar and
salaries payable to the judicial services in these States, it was considered
that there was no need to increase the salaries payable to the Judges
of these High Courts to the level of the other High Courts. It was
proposed to amend sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 10 of the Second
Schedule to the Constitution providing for a salary of Rs. 3,000 to the
Chief Justices and Rs. 2,500 to the other Judges of these three High
Courts.
Sometimes it becomes necessary to appoint a retired district Judge
as a Judge of a High Court. In the absence of a legal provision for
withholding the pension due to such a Judge, it has been the practice
to obtain from him an undertaking that he would not claim the pension
for the period for which he serves as a High Court Judge. Since this
was obviously unsatisfactory, it was proposed to add a proviso to
paragraph 10(1) of the Second Schedule on the same lines as the
proviso to paragraph 9(1) thereof regulating the salary of a Judge of
the Supreme Court in similar circumstances.
Sub-paragraphs (3) and (4) of paragraph 10 were no longer required
in view of appropriate provision made in the High Court Judges
(Conditions of Service) Act, 1954.
Clause 23.The existence of three entries in the legislative lists
(33 of List I, 36 of List II and 42 of List III) relating to the essentially
single subject of acquisition and requisitioning of property by the
Government were giving rise to unnecessary technical difficulties in
legislation. In order to avoid these difficulties and simplify the
constitutional position, it was proposed to omit the entries in the Union
and State List and replace the entry in the Concurrent List by a
comprehensive entry covering the whole subject.
Clause 24.Entry 67 of the Union List refers to ancient and
historical monuments and records, and archaeological sites and remains,
declared by Parliament by law to be of national importance. A large
number of ancient monuments, archaeological sites, etc., were declared
to be of national importance by an Act of Parliament. It required another
59
Act of Parliament to make the slightest alteration in, or addition to, the
lists in that Act, which was an unduly cumbersome procedure. It was,
therefore, proposed to amend the entry substituting for the words
declared by Parliament by law the words declared by or under law
made by Parliament. The same amendment was also proposed to be
made in the connected provisions, Entry 12 of the State List, Entry 40
of the Concurrent List and article 49.
Clause 25.Although the Union List has two Entries 7 and 52,
relating to industries, the latter alone is referred to in Entry 24 of
List II. The omission of Entry 7 of List I appeared to be due to an
oversight and was sought to be rectified in this clause.
Clause 26 and the Schedule.These contain the consequential and
minor amendments and repeals proposed to be made in the Constitution
and in the Constitution (Removal of Difficulties) Order No. VIII
pertaining to the Assam tribal areas.
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, when introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 18 April 195670, was titled as the Constitution
(Ninth Amendment) Bill, 1956. The Bill was in a way complementary
to the States Reorganisation Bill, 1956 which was also introduced in
the Lok Sabha on the same day.
The Constitution (Ninth Amendment) Bill sought to amend a large
number of provisions in the Constitution so as to give effect to the
scheme of the States reorgansiation and also to certain other necessary
changes relating to the High Courts and High Court Judges, the
executive powers of the Union and the States and the legislative lists.
The Bill sought to: (i) amend articles 1, 3, 31A, 49, 58, 66, 72, 73,
80, 101, 112, 131, 151-53, 168, 171, 208, 209, 214, 216, 217, 219,
222, 239, 241, 244, 246, 254, 255, 259, 267, 270, 280, 283, 291, 299,
308-311, 315-318, 320, 323, 324, 332, 333, 337, 339, 341, 343, 348,
356, 361, 366-368, Headings of Parts VI and VIII; The First, Second,
Fourth, Fifth and Seventh Schedules; (ii) substitute articles 81, 82,
170, 220, 224, 230-232, 239, 240, 264, 290 and 371, by new articles;
70
60
(iii) omit articles 242, 259, 278, 306, 379 to 391, Parts VII and IX;
(iv) insert new articles 258A, 290A and 350A in the Constitution and
(v) make consequential amendments in the Constitution (Removal of
Difficulties) Order No. VIII. On a motion, moved in the Lok Sabha on
26 April adopted on 27 April 1956, and concurred in by the Rajya
Sabha on 2 May 1956, the Bill was referred to a Joint Committee of
the Houses of Parliament71.
The Report of the Joint Committee on the Bill was presented to the
Lok Sabha on 16 July 195672. The Committee besides suggesting
amendments in some of the clauses of the Bill and its Schedule also
proposed insertion of three new clauses. The Bill, as reported by the
Joint Committee, was considered by the Lok Sabha on 4, 5 and
6 September and, with some further modifications, passed on
6 September 195673. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was
considered by the Rajya Sabha on 10 and 11 September and passed on
11 September 195674.
Meanwhile in August 1956, the State Reorganisation Bill had been
passed by Parliament and, having received the Presidents assent on
31 August 1956, had become an Act which was to be effective from
1 November 1956. The Bill, as finally adopted, differed from the Bill,
as introduced, in many respectsthe most notable of which was the
reversal of the original proposal to break up the existing State of Bombay
and reorganise its territories so as to form two new StatesGujarat
and Maharashtraand convert the Greater Bombay district (and some
adjacent areas) into a Union territory. In August 1956, Parliament passed
another Act having a bearing on the States reorganisation. This was the
Bihar and West Bengal (Transfer of territories) Act which received the
Presidents assent on 1 September 1956.
Thus when Parliament took up the Constitution (Ninth Amendment)
Bill (as reported by the Joint Committee) for consideration in September
1956, it had to take into account the reorganisation of the States as
71
72
73
74
Ibid., 26 and 27 April 1956, cc. 4672-73 and 6595; R.S. Deb., 2 May 1956,
cc. 1032, 1120.
L.S. Deb., 16 July 1956, c. 8.
Ibid., 6 September 1956, c. 607.
R.S. Deb., 11 September 1956, c. 4219.
61
envisaged in the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 and the Bihar and
West Bengal (Transfer of territories) Act, 1956.
Two formal amendments to clause 1 of the Bill were made by
which the short title of the Act was changed from the Constitution
(Ninth Amendment) Act, 1956 to the Constitution (Seventh
Amendment) Act, 1956 and the date of its commencement altered to
1 November 1956 in place of 1 October 1956 as originally proposed.
Both the amendments were adopted by the Lok Sabha on 6 September
195675.
62
West Bengal (Transfer of territories) Act, 1956 had already been placed
on the statute book. In keeping with these measures, the Minister of
Home Affairs, Pandit G.B. pant, moved certain amendments, which, in
effect, sought two significant changes in the First Schedule to the
Constitution as reported by the Joint Committee. These were:
(i) retention of the existing State of Bombay, thereby reversing the
original proposal to break it up so as to form two new StatesGujarat
and Maharashtra, and a new Union territory, viz., Bombay; and
(ii) redescription of the territories of the States of Bihar and West
Bengal in consequence of the transfer of certain areas from the former
to the latter as provided for in the Bihar and West Bengal (Transfer of
territories) Act, 1956. The amendments, moved by Pt. Pant, were
accepted by the House and clause 2 of the Bill, as so amended, was
adopted76. Later, on 11 September 1956, the clause, as amended by the
Lok Sabha, was adopted by the Rajya Sabha77.
63
78
79
80
81
64
Ibid.
65
66
periods for clearing off arrears of work. The Joint Committee proposed
addition of a new clause (3) to the revised article in order to make it
clear that no person appointed as an additional or acting Judge of a
High Court could hold office after attaining the age of 60 years.
Clause 15, as amended by the Committee, was adopted by the
Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 5 and 11 September 1956,
respectively88.
Ibid.
67
68
90
L.S. Deb., 6 September 1956, cc. 5833, 5861 and 6057-58; R.S. Deb.,
11 September 1956, c. 4215.
Ibid., cc. 6057-58; Ibid, c. 4215.
69
70
71
72
(ii) Judges of the Kerala, Mysore and Rajasthan High Courts were
to be given salaries at a lower rate than that provided for the
Judges of the other High Courts.
(iii) In order to adjust any pension which a High Court Judge
might be in receipt of with his salary as such Judge, a proviso
on the lines of the proviso to Paragraph 9 (1) of the Second
Schedule (regulating the salary of a Judge of the Supreme
Court in similar circumstances) was to be added in Paragraph
10 (1).
(iv) Sub-paragraphs (3) and (4) of Paragraph 10 were to be deleted
since appropriate provision in regard to the matters dealt with
in these sub-paragraphs (reimbursement of travelling expenses,
rights in respect of leave and pension), had been made in the
High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954.
The Joint Committee re-numbered clause 22 of the Bill as
clause 25. The distinction made in the original clause between the
Judges of the Kerala, Mysore and Rajasthan High Courts and the Judges
of other High Courts in the matter of salaries did not find favour with
the Committee. The Committee, therefore, amended the clause providing
for the same salary to the Judges of all High Courts. The Committee
also proposed an amendment in the proposed proviso to Paragraph 10(1),
and a similar amendment in the proviso to Paragraph 9(1) relating to
Judges of the Supreme Court. These amendments provided for the
cases where a Judge in receipt of a pension for previous service had,
before appointment, either commuted a portion of his pension or
received a retirement gratuity in addition to pension. The Committee
proposed that in either case his salary should be further reduced by the
amount of the commuted portion of the pension or the pension
equivalent of the gratuity, as the case may be.
In clause 25 (as so re-numbered and as amended by the Joint
Committee), an amendment moved by Shri Datar in the Lok Sabha
was accepted98. This amendment sought to replace the original subparagraphs (3) and (4) of Paragraph 10 in the Second Schedule, by a
new sub-paragraph (3) making a special provision in respect of certain
98
73
Chief Justices of High Courts who had earlier held a similar office in
any of the former Part B States99.
With these changes, clause 25 amending the Second Schedule was
adopted by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on 5 and 11 September
1956, respectively100.
100
101
For Text of the provision see the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956
in Annexure (A).
L.S. Deb., 5 September 1956, c. 5806; R.S. Deb., 11 September 1956, c. 4215.
Ibid., 6 September 1956, c. 6058; Ibid.
74
75
76
77
VIII
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1960102
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighth Amendment) Bill, 1959 was introduced
102
Bill No. 79 of 1959; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Pt. G.B. Pant on 16 November 1959; Debated, Lok Sabha: 30 November and
1 December 1959; Rajya Sabha: 7 December 1959; Ratified as per requirement
of proviso to article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures,
namely, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bombay, Madras, Mysore, Orissa, Punjab,
Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal; Presidents Assent: 5 January 1960;
Date of Gazette Notification: 6 January 1960; Date of Commencement:
5 January 1960.
78
103
104
105
106
107
Ibid., c. 2763.
108
79
IX
THE CONSTITUTION (NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1960109
Legislative History
The Constitution (Ninth Amendment) Bill 1960 was introduced in
the Lok Sabha on 16 December 1960110. The Bill sought to amend the
First Schedule to the Constitution with a view to giving effect to the
transfer of certain territories to Pakistan in pursuance of the Agreements
entered into between the Governments of India and Pakistan.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 19 and 20 December
and passed in the original form on 20 December 1960111. The Bill as
passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha on
22 and 23 December and passed on 23 December 1960112.
109
110
111
112
80
X
THE CONSTITUTION (TENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1961113
Legislative History
The Constitution (Tenth Amendment) Bill, 1961 was introduced in
the Lok Sabha on 11 August 1961114. The Bill sought to amend article
240 and the First Schedule to the Constitution.
113
114
Bill No. 43 of 1961; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Pt. G.B. Pant on 11 August 1961; Debated, Lok Sabha; 14 August 1961;
Rajya Sabha: 16 August 1961; Presidents Assent: 16 August 1961; Date of
Gazette Notification: 17 August 1961; Date of Commencement: 11 August 1961.
L.S. Deb., 11 August 1961, c. 1658.
81
The Bill was considered and passed in the original form by the
Lok Sabha on 14 August 1961115 and by the Rajya Sabha on 16 August
1961116.
XI
THE CONSTITUTION (ELEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1961117
82
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eleventh Amendment) Bill, 1961 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 30 November 1961118. The Bill sought to amend
articles 66 and 71 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed in the original form by the
Lok Sabha on 5 December 1961 and by the Rajya Sabha on
12 December 1961119.
83
XII
THE CONSTITUTION (TWELFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1962120
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Bill, 1962 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 12 March 1962121. The Bill sought to amend
article 240 and the First Schedule to the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed in the original form by the
Lok Sabha on 14 March 1962 and by the Rajya Sabha on 20 March
1962122.
121
122
Bill No. 3 of 1962; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Prime Minister Shri Jawaharlal
Nehru on 12 March 1962; Debated, Lok Sabha: 14 March 1962; Rajya Sabha:
20 March 1962; Presidents Assent: 27 March 1962; Date of Gazette Notification:
28 March 1962; Date of Commencement: 20 December 1961.
L.S. Deb., 12 March 1962, c. 37.
Ibid., 14 March 1962, c. 327; R.S. Deb., 20 March 1962, c. 842.
84
XIII
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1962123
85
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirteenth Amendment) Bill, 1962 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 21 August 1962124. The Bill sought to: (i) amend
Part XXI and (ii) insert a new article 371A in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed in the original form by the
Lok Sabha on 28 August 1962 and by the Rajya Sabha on 3 September
1962125.
86
Section 2(b) of the Act has inserted a new article 371A providing
the following special provisions with respect to the State of Nagaland:
No Act of Parliament, affecting religious or social practices of the
Nagas, Naga Customary Law and Procedure; administration of civil
and criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga
Customary Law, and ownership and transfer of land and its resources
shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the State Legislature
decides so by a resolution.
The Governor of Nagaland shall have special responsibility for law
and order in the State so long as, in his opinion, internal disturbances
in the Naga Hills-Tuensang Area continue. The Governor is also
empowered to exercise, after consulting the Council of Ministers, his
individual judgement as to the action to be taken in this regard. The
decision taken by the Governor shall be final. The President may, if
satisfied that the special circumstances no longer exist in the State,
withdraw these special responsibilities of the Governor.
The Governor shall ensure that any money provided for any specific
service or purpose, by the Government of India, out of the Consolidated
Fund, is included in the Demand for Grant relating to that service or
purpose only.
The Governor shall establish, by public notification, a regional
council for Tuensang district consisting of thirty-five members and, in
his discretion, make rules inter alia providing for the composition of
the regional council, the manner of the selection of members, their
qualification and terms of office, salaries, etc. and the procedure and
conduct of business of the regional council.
The Governor is authorized to carry on the administration and
make regulations for the peace, progress and good government of the
Tuensang district for a period of ten years and more, if necessary. No
Act of Legislature of Nagaland shall apply to this district, unless the
Governor, on the recommendation of the regional council, so directs.
The Governor at his discretion shall arrange for an equitable allocation
of the money provided by the Government of India for the requirement
of the Government of Nagaland, between this district and the rest of
the State. Further, the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister
shall appoint a Minister for Tunesang district from among the members
of Legislature representing the Tuensang district. However, the final
87
XIV
THE CONSTITUTION (FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1962126
Bill No. 86 of 1962; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri on 30 August 1962; Debated, Lok Sabha: 4 September
1962; Rajya Sabha: 7 September 1962; Ratified as per requirement of proviso
to article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures, namely,
Andhra Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Madras, Maharashtra, Mysore,
Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal; Presidents Assent:
28 December 1962; Date of Gazette Notification: 29 December 1962;
Date of Commencement: 28 December 1962.
88
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fourteenth Amendment) Bill, 1962 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 30 August 1962127. The Bill sought to: (i) amend
articles 81 and 240 and the First and the Fourth Schedules to the
Constitution and (ii) insert a new article 239A in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and, with some modifications, passed by
the Lok Sabha on 4 September 1962128. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was passed by the Rajya Sabha on 7 September 1962129.
Clauses 1, 2, 3 and 5 to 7 of the Bill were adopted, in the original
form, by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 4 and 7 September
1962, respectively130.
89
90
XV
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1963133
Bill No. 111 of 1962; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Law,
Shri A.K. Sen on 23 November 1962; Referred to the Joint Committee; Report
of the Committee presented: 8 March 1963; Debated Lok Sabha: 8 and
11 December 1962, 29 and 30 April and 1 May 1963; Rajya Sabha: 12 December
1962, 7 and 9 May 1963; Ratified as per requirement of proviso to article
368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures, namely, Andhra
Pradesh, Assam, Kerala, Madras, Mysore, Punjab, Rajasthan and West Bengal;
Presidents Assent: 5 October 1963; Date of Gazette Notification: 7 October
1963; Date of Commencement: 5 October 1963.
91
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Bill, 1962 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 23 November 1962134. The Bill sought to:
(i) amend articles 124, 128, 217, 220, 222, 224, 226, 276, 297, 311 and
316 and the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and (ii) insert a new
article 224A in the Constitution. On a motion moved in the Lok Sabha
on 8 December and adopted on 11 December 1962 and concurred in
by the Rajya Sabha on 12 December 1962, the Bill was referred to a
Joint Committee of the Houses of Parliament135.
134
135
92
93
by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 1 and 9 May 1963,
respectively141.
94
95
96
97
New clause (3), inserted in article 217 with retrospective effect, enables
the President, after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, to
determine any question as to the age of a Judge of a High Court.
(Section 4)
A new clause (2) was inserted in article 222 to provide for payment
of compensatory allowance to a Judge in addition to his salary on his
transfer from one High Court to another. (Section 5)
A new article 224A was inserted to provide for the appointment of
a retired High Court Judge to sit and act as a Judge of a High Court.
(Section 7)
New clause (1A) inserted in article 226 provides that the High
Court, within whose jurisdiction the cause of action arises, may also
exercise jurisdiction to issue directions, orders or writs to any
Government, authority or person notwithstanding that the seat of such
Government or authority or the residence of such person is outside the
territorial jurisdiction of the High Court. (Section 8)
In article 297 after the words territorial waters, the words or the
continental shelf have been inserted. (Section 9)
For the existing clauses (2) and (3) of article 311, new clauses were
substituted to provide inter alia that a civil servant shall not be dismissed
or removed or reduced in rank except after an inquiry in which he has
been informed of the charges and given a reasonable opportunity of
being heard at the inquiry stage, and when after inquiry it is proposed
to impose any such penalty on him, the reasonable opportunity afforded
to him would be limited to making a representation on the penalty
proposed only on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry.
This provision is subject to certain exceptions as provided for therein.
(Section 10)
A new clause (1A) was inserted in article 316 to provide for
appointment of an acting Chairman of a Public Service Commission
when that office is vacant or when the permanent Chairman is on
leave or is for any other reason unable to perform the duties of his
office. (Section 11)
Entry 78 in List 1 of the Seventh Schedule has been amended
retrospectively inserting the brackets and words (including vacations)
after the word organisation. (Section 12)
98
XVI
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1963147
Bill No. 1 of 1963; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Law, Shri A.K.
Sen on 21 January 1963, Referred to Joint Committee; Report of the Committee
presented: 18 March 1963; Debated, Lok Sabha: 22 January and 2 May 1963;
Rajya Sabha: 25 January and 9 May 1963; Ratified as per requirement of
proviso to article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures,
namely, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Kerala, Madras, Mysore, Punjab, Rajasthan
and West Bengal; Presidents Assent: 5 October 1963; Date of Gazette
Notification: 7 October 1963; Date of Commencement: 5 October 1963.
99
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Bill, 1963 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 21 January 1963148. The Bill sought to amend
articles 19, 84 and 173 and the Third Schedule to the Constitution. On
a motion moved, in the Lok Sabha on 22 January adopted on the same
day and concurred to by the Rajya Sabha on 25 January 1963, the Bill
was referred to a Joint Committee of the Houses of Parliament149.
The Report of the Joint Committee on the Bill was presented to the
Lok Sabha on 18 March 1963150. The Committee did not recommend
any amendment in the Bill except a formal change in the Enacting
Formula.
The Bill, as reported by the Joint Committee, was considered and
passed by the Lok Sabha on 2 May 1963 and by the Rajya Sabha on
9 May 1963151.
150
151
100
XVII
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTEENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1964152
101
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventeenth Amendment) Act, 1964, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27 May 1964, was titled as the
Constitution (Nineteenth Amendment) Bill 1964153. The Bill sought to
amend article 31A and the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 1 and 2 June and,
as amended, passed by the House on 2 June 1964. The Bill as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 4 and 5 June
and passed on 5 June 1964154.
By a formal amendment to clause 1 of the Bill, the short title was
changed to The Constitution (Seventeenth Amendment) Act155.
Clause 2 of the Bill, which sought to amend article 31A, was
adopted, in the original form, by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha
on 2 and 5 June 1964, respectively156.
154
155
156
L.S. Deb., 27 May 1964, c. 107. See also the Constitution (Seventeenth
Amendment) Bill, 1963: for Legislative History in Chapter III and for Text in
Annexure (B).
Ibid., 2 June 1964, c. 719; R.S. Deb., 5 June 1964, c. 1050.
Ibid., c. 681; Ibid., c. 1039.
Ibid., c. 661; Ibid., c. 1031.
102
Entry 64) in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution. The proposed new
Entry 33 read as under:
The Gujarat Surviving Alienations Abolition Act, 1963 (Gujarat
Act XXXIII of 1963).
In the aforesaid Entry 33, an amendment, moved by Shri A.P. Jain
in the Lok Sabha, was accepted157. The amendment was to the effect
that at the end of Entry 33 the words, brackets and figures except in
so far as this Act relates to an alienation referred to in sub-clause (d)
of clause (3) of section 2 thereof be added.
Clause 3 of the Bill was adopted, in this amended form, by the
Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 2 and 5 June 1964, respectively158.
103
XVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTEENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1966159
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act, 1966, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 25 July 1966, was titled as the
Constitution (Twentieth Amendment) Bill, 1966160. The Bill sought to
amend article 3 of the Constitution.
159
160
104
XIX
THE CONSTITUTION (NINETEENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1966162
162
Ibid., 10 August 1966, cc. 3998-4001; R.S. Deb., 24 August 1966. cc. 39263933.
Bill No. 57 of 1966; Introduced as the Constitution (Twenty-first Amendment)
Bill in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Law, Shri G.S. Pathak on 29 August 1966;
Debated, Lok Sabha: 8, 9, 10 and 22 November 1966; Rajya Sabha: 30 November
1966; Presidents Assent: 11 December 1966; Date of Gazette Notification:
11 December 1966; Date of Commencement: 11 December 1966.
105
Legislative History
The Constitution (Nineteenth Amendment) Act, 1966, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 29 August 1966, was titled as the
Constitution (Twenty-First) Amendment, Bill, 1966163. The Bill sought
to amend article 324 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 8, 9, 10 and
22 November and passed on 22 November 1966 with only a formal
amendment in clause 1, changing the short title to Constitution
(Nineteenth Amendment) Act164. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha,
was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 30 November 1966165.
Clause 2 was adopted in the original form by the Lok Sabha and
Rajya Sabha on 22 and 30 November 1966, respectively166.
106
XX
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1966167
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twentieth Amendment) Act, 1966, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 25 November 1966, was titled as the
Constitution (Twenty-third Amendment) Bill, 1966168. The Bill sought
to insert a new article 233A in the Constitution.
167
168
107
XXI
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1967171
108
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-first Amendment) Bill, 1967 was
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 20 March 1967172. The Bill sought
to amend the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 4 April 1967 and
passed in the original form on the same day173. The Bill, as passed by
the Rajya Sabha, was considered and passed by the Lok Sabha on
7 April 1967174.
XXII
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1969175
109
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-second Amendment) Bill, 1969 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 10 April 1969176. The Bill sought to:
(i) amend article 275 and (ii) insert new articles 244A and 371B in the
Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed in the original form by the
Lok Sabha on 15 April 1969 and the Rajya Sabha on 30 April 1969177.
177
L.S. Deb., 10 April 1969, c. 180. See also the Constitution (Twenty-second
Amendment) Bill, 1968: for Legislative History in Chapter III and for Text in
Annexure (B).
Ibid., 15 April 1969, p. 277; R.S. Deb., 30 April 1969, c. 780.
110
XXIII
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1969178
111
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-third Amendment) Bill, 1969 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 21 August 1969179. The Bill sought to
amend articles 330, 332, 333 and 334 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 8 and 9 December
and passed in the original form on 9 December 1969180. The Bill, as
passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha on
16 and 17 December and passed on 17 December 1969181.
112
XXIV
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1971182
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1971 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 28 July 1971183. The Bill sought to
amend articles 13 and 368 of the Constitution.
182
183
Bill No. 105 of 1971; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Law and
Justice, Shri H.R. Gokhale on 28 July 1971; Debated, Lok Sabha: 3 and
4 August 1971; Rajya Sabha: 10 and 11 August 1971; Ratified as per requirement
of proviso to article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures,
namely, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir,
Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Nagaland, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh;
Presidents Assent: 5 November 1971; Date of Gazette Notification: 5 November
1971; Date of Commencement: 5 November 1971.
L.S. Deb., 28 July 1971, c. 292.
113
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 3 and 4 August and
passed, in the original form, on 4 August 1971184. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 10 and
11 August and passed by that House on 11 August 1971185.
XXV
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1971186
114
held that the Constitution guarantees right to compensation, that is, the
equivalent in money of the property compulsorily acquired. Thus in
effect the adequacy of compensation and the relevancy of the principles
laid down by the Legislature for determining the amount of
compensation virtually became justiciable inasmuch as the Court could
go into the question whether the amount paid to the owner of the
property was what might be regarded reasonably as compensation for
loss of property. In the same case, the Court also held that a law which
seeks to acquire or requisition property for a public purpose should
also satisfy the requirements of article 19(1)(f).
The Bill sought to surmount the difficulties placed in the way of
giving effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy by the aforesaid
interpretation. The word compensation was sought to be omitted
from article 31(2) and replaced by the word amount. It was also
clarified that the said amount might be given otherwise than in cash.
The Bill also proposed to provide that article 19(1)(f) shall not apply
to any law relating to the acquisition or requisitioning of property for
a public purpose.
The Bill further sought to introduce a new article 31C providing
that if any law is passed to give effect to the Directive Principles
contained in clauses (b) and (c) of article 39 and contains a declaration
to that effect, such law shall not be deemed to be void on the ground
that it takes away or abridges any of the rights contained in articles 14,
19 or 31 and shall not be questioned on the ground that it does not give
effect to those principles. For this provision to apply in the case of
laws made by State Legislatures, it was necessary that the relevant Bill
should be reserved for the consideration of the President and receive
his assent.
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1971 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 28 July 1971187. The Bill sought to:
(i) amend article 31 and (ii) insert a new article 31C in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 30 November and
1 December and, as amended, passed on 1 December 1971188. The
187
188
115
Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha
on 7 and 8 December and passed on 8 December 1971189.
Clauses 1 and 3 of the Bill were adopted, in the original form, by
the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 1 and 8 December 1971,
respectively190.
Amendment of Article 31
Clause 2 of the Bill sought to amend article 31(2) of the Constitution
to make it clear that no law providing for the compulsory acquisition
or requisitioning of property could be called in question in any Court
on the ground that the amount fixed or determined under such law to
be given to the owner of the property is not adequate. During the
consideration of the clause by the Lok Sabha, the Minister of Law,
Shri H.R. Gokhale, moved an amendment seeking addition of the
following proviso at the end of the proposed clause (2) of article 31:
Provided that in making any law providing for the compulsory
acquisition of any property of an educational institution established
and administered by a minority, referred to in clause (1) of article
30, the State shall ensure that the amount fixed by or determined
under such law for the acquisition of such property is such as
would not restrict or abrogate the right guaranteed under that clause.
The amendment was accepted by the House. The clause, as amended,
was adopted by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 1 and
8 December 1971, respectively191.
191
116
clarified that the said amount may be given otherwise than in cash.
However, in making any law providing for the compulsory acquisition
of any property of an educational institution established and administered
by a minority, the State is enjoined to ensure that the amount fixed by
or determined under such law is such as would not restrict the minoritys
right under article 30(1). A new clause (2B) inserted in article 31
provided that article 19(1)(f), which guarantees the right to hold and
dispose of property, shall not apply to any law relating to the acquisition
or requisitioning of property for a public purpose. (Section 2)
A newly inserted article 31C provided that a law giving effect to
the Directive Principles of State Policy specified in article 39(b) and
(c) shall not be void on the ground of contravention of articles 14, 19
or 31 and that a law containing a declaration that it is for giving effect
to these Directive Principles will not be open to judicial scrutiny on the
ground that it does not give effect to these Directive Principles. For
this provision to apply in the case of State laws, however, it is necessary
that the relevant Bill should have been reserved for the consideration
of the President and received his assent. (Section 3)
XXVI
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1971192
Bill No. 112 of 1971; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Prime Minister
Shrimati Indira Gandhi on 9 August 1971; Debated, Lok Sabha: 1 and
2 December 1971; Rajya Sabha: 7, 8 and 9 December 1971; Presidents Assent:
28 December 1971; Date of Gazette Notification: 29 December 1971; Date of
Commencement: 28 December 1971.
117
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1971 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 9 August 1971193. The Bill sought to:
(i) omit articles 291 and 362; (ii) insert a new article 363A and
(iii) amend article 366 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 1 and 2 December
1971 and passed in the original form on 2 December 1971194. The Bill,
as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha on
7, 8 and 9 December and passed on 9 December 1971195.
194
195
L.S. Deb., 9 August 1971, c. 262. See also the Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment)
Bill, 1970: for Legislative History in Chapter III and for Text in Annexure (B).
Ibid, 2 December 1971, c. 262.
R.S. Deb., 9 December 1971 c. 152.
118
XXVII
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1971196
Bill No. 173 of 1971; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of State in the
Ministry of Home Affairs, Shri K.C. Pant on 21 December 1971; Debated,
Lok Sabha: 21 December 1971; Rajya Sabha: 23 December 1971; Presidents
Assent: 30 December 1971; Date of Gazette Notification: 31 December 1971;
Date of Commencement: Sections 1 and 3 came into force on 30 December
1971; and Sections 2, 4 and 5 came into force on 15 February 1972.
119
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-seventh Amendment) Bill, 1971 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 21 December 1971197. The Bill sought
to: (i) amend articles 239A and 240 and (ii) insert new articles 239B
and 371C in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed in the original form by the
Lok Sabha on 21 December 1971 and by the Rajya Sabha on
23 December 1971198.
197
198
120
121
XXVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1972199
122
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1972, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 26 May 1972, was titled as the
Constitution (Thirty-first Amendment) Bill, 1972200. The Bill sought
to: (i) insert a new article 312A of the Constitution and (ii) omit
article 314 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 29 May and passed
on the same day with only formal amendments replacing the words
Thirty-first Amendment by the words Twenty-eighth Amendment
in the short title as also in the proposed new article 312A201. The Bill,
as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha on
30 and 31 May and passed by that House on 31 May 1972202.
200
201
202
123
is holding or has held the office of the Chief Justice or other Judge of
the Supreme Court or a High Court, the Comptroller and AuditorGeneral of India, the Chairman or other member of the Union or a
State Public Service Commission or Chief Election Commissioner,
nothing in (a) or (b) above shall be construed as empowering Parliament
to vary or revoke after his appointment to such post, the conditions of
his service to his disadvantage except in so far as such conditions of
service are applicable to him by reason of his being a person appointed
by the Secretary of State or Secretary of State-in-Council to a civil
service of the Crown in India.
The Supreme Court or any other Court shall not have jurisdiction
in: (a) any dispute arising out of any provision of, or any endorsement
on, any covenant, agreement or other similar instrument which was
entered into or executed by any person referred to in clause (1), or
arising out of any letter issued to such person, in relation to his
appointment to any civil service of the Crown in India or his continuance
in service under the Government of the Dominion of India or a Province
thereof; and (b) any dispute in respect of any right, liability or obligation
under article 314 as originally enacted. (Section 2)
Section 3 omitted article 314 of the Constitution.
XXIX
THE CONSTITUTION (TWENTY-NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1972203
124
125
Legislative History
The Constitution (Twenty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1972, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 26 May 1972, was titled as the
Constitution (Thirty-second Amendment) Bill, 1972204. The Bill sought
to amend the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed by the Lok Sabha on 29 May
1972, with a formal amendment changing its short title from the
Constitution (Thirty-second Amendment) Act to the Constitution
(Twenty-ninth Amendment) Act205. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 31 May
1972206.
Clause 2 of the Bill as adopted, in the original form by the
Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 29 and 31 May 1972, respectively207.
XXX
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1972208
126
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 1972 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 24 May 1972209. The Bill sought to amend
article 133 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed in the original form by the
Lok Sabha on 17 August 1972 and the Rajya Sabha on 22 August 1972210.
127
Nothing in this Act shall affect: (a) any appeal under sub-clause (a)
or sub-clause (b) or sub-clause (c) of clause (1) of article 133 of the
Constitution which immediately before the commencement of this Act
was pending before the Supreme Court or (b) any appeal preferred on
or after the commencement of this Act against any judgment, decree
or final order in a civil proceeding of a High Court by virtue of a
certificate given by the High Court before the commencement of this
Act under sub-clause (a) or sub-clause (b) or sub-clause (c) of
clause (1) of article 133. Every such appeal may be heard and disposed
of or, as the case may be, entertained, heard and disposed of by the
Supreme Court as if this Act had not been passed. Subject to the above
provisions, no appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court under clause (1)
of article 133 of the Constitution from any judgment, decree or final
order arising out of a suit or other civil proceeding which was instituted
or commenced in any Court before the commencement of this Act
unless such appeal satisfies the provisions of that clause as amended
by this Act. (Section 3)
XXXI
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1973211
Bill No. 31 of 1973; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Law and
Justice, Shri H.R. Gokhale on 26 April 1973; Debated, Lok Sabha: 8 May 1973;
Rajya Sabha: 15 May 1973; Ratified as per requirement of proviso to
article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures, namely,
Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala,
Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Punjab, Rajasthan,
Tamil Nadu, Tripura and West Bengal; Presidents Assent: 17 October 1973;
Date of Gazette Notification: 17 October 1973; Date of Commencement:
17 October 1973.
128
States increased to 506, six more than the permissible limit of 500
under article 81. The actual total number of elected members of the the
Lok Sabha was 522 (489 from the fifteen major States, 17 from the six
smaller States of Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur,
Meghalaya, Nagaland and Tripura each of which has population of less
than six million and 16 from the nine Union territories).
Clause (2) of article 81 of the Constitution lays down that for the
purposes of sub-clause (a) of clause (1), there shall be allotted to each
State a number of seats in the House of the People in such manner that
the ratio between that number and the population of the State is, so far
as practicable, the same for all States and that each State shall be
divided into territorial constituencies in such manner that the ratio
between the population of each constituency and the number of seats
allotted to it is, so far as practicable, the same throughout the State.
Under clause (3) of article 81, the expression population means the
population as ascertained in the last preceding census of which the
relevant figures have been published. Article 82 enjoins that on the
completion of each census, the allocation of seats in the House of the
People to the States and the division of each State into territorial
constituencies shall be readjusted by such authority and in such manner
as Parliament may by law determine. In pursuance of article 82,
Parliament has enacted the Delimitation Act, 1972 and the Delimitation
Commission has been constituted to undertake the necessary task of
the readjustment envisaged in article 82. It will be noticed that adherence
to the principles laid down in clause (2) of article 81 by the Delimitation
Commission in undertaking readjustment as enjoined by article 82 on
the basis of the 1971 census figures may have the effect of affecting
the number of seats allotted to the States in the House of the People.
It was felt that it would be better to ensure that any readjustment and
consequent allocation of seats did not adversely affect the existing
number of seats allotted to each State in the House of the People and
to achieve this purpose it would be necessary to increase the strength
of the Lok Sabha suitably.
In order to ensure that there is no reduction in the existing
representation in the House of the People in respect of any of the
States, section 2 of the Act amends article 81 so as to increase the
upper limit for representation of the States from 500 to 525. The
opportunity is taken to decrease the limit for the Union territories from
25 to 20, as the existing representation for Union territories is only 16.
129
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-first Amendment) Bill, 1973 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 26 April 1973212. The Bill sought to amend
articles 81, 330 and 332 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 8 May 1973 and as
amended, passed on the same day213. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 15 May
1973214.
212
213
214
130
216
217
L.S. Deb., 8 May 1973, cc. 289, 302; R.S. Deb., 15 May 1973, cc. 235, 241 and
244.
L.S. Deb., 8 May 1973, cc. 289-290.
Ibid., c. 296; R.S. Deb., 15 May 1973, c. 238.
131
132
XXXII
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1973218
133
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-second Amendment) Act, 1973, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 14 December 1973, was titled as the
Constitution (Thirty-third Amendment) Bill, 1973219. The Bill sought
to: (i) amend article 371 and the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution
and (ii) insert new articles 371D and 371E in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 18 December 1973
and, as amended, passed on the same day220. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
20 December 1973221.
219
220
221
134
223
224
225
L.S. Deb., 18 December 1973, cc. 335, 355 and 364; R.S. Deb., 20 December
1973, cc. 223, 230.
L.S. Deb., 18 December 1973, cc. 355, 364.
Ibid., cc. 335-336 and 346.
R.S. Deb., 20 December 1973, cc. 226, 234.
135
136
XXXIII
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1974226
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-third Amendment) Act, 1974, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 3 May 1974, was titled as the
Constitution (Thirty-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1974227. The Bill sought
to amend articles 101 and 190 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 8 May 1974 and
passed on the same day with only a formal amendment replacing the
words Thirty-fifth Amendment in clause 1 by the words Thirty226
227
137
XXXIV
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1974230
138
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1974 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 3 May 1974231. The Bill sought to
amend the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 26 August 1974 and
passed, as amended, on the same day232. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
28 August 1974233.
139
XXXV
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1974236
140
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-fifth Amendment) Act, 1974, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 2 September 1974, was titled as the
Constitution (Thirty-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1974237. The Bill sought
to: (i) amend articles 80 and 81 and (ii) insert a new article 2A and a
new Schedulethe Tenth Schedule, in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 4 September 1974
and, as amended, passed238 on the same day. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
7 September 1974239.
237
238
239
141
142
XXXVI
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1975243
143
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-sixth Amendment) Act, 1975, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 21 April 1975, was titled as the
144
145
146
147
XXXVII
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1975252
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-seventh Amendment) Bill, 1975 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 9 April 1975253. The Bill sought to
amend articles 239A and 240 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered and passed, in the original form, by the
Lok Sabha on 23 April 1975254 and by the Rajya Sabha on 26 April
1975255.
252
253
254
255
Bill No. 32 of 1975; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Shri K. Brahmananda Reddy on 9 April 1975; Debated, Lok Sabha: 23 April
1975; Rajya Sabha: 26 April 1975; Presidents Assent: 3 May 1975; Date of
Gazette Notification: 5 May 1975; Date of Commencement: 3 May 1975.
L.S. Deb., 9 April 1975, cc. 244-245.
Ibid., 23 April 1975, c. 383.
R.S. Deb., 26 April 1975, c. 190.
148
XXXVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1975256
149
being raised that the issue was subject to judicial scrutiny and there
was litigation involving the justiciability of this issue. To place the
matter beyond doubt, the Bill sought to provide in the Constitution
itself that the satisfaction of the President, Governor or Administrator
shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any Court
on any ground.
Article 352 empowers the President to declare Emergency if he is
satisfied that the security of India or any part of it is threatened by war,
external aggression or internal disturbance. Article 356 empowers the
President to assume to himself the functions of the Government of a
State if the constitutional machinery in any State fails and the
Government in the State cannot be carried on. Likewise article 360
empowers the President to declare Financial Emergency if he is satisfied
that the financial stability of India is threatened. Here again, the issue
regarding satisfaction is on the face of the articles, clearly not justiciable.
However, as the validity of the Proclamation issued under article 352
had been challenged in several proceedings and a litigation of this
nature involved waste of public time and money, the Bill sought to
amend these three articles so as to make the satisfaction of the President
final and conclusive and not justiciable on any ground.
In relation to article 352, contentions had been raised in certain
writ petitions that while the original Proclamation of Emergency was
in operation no further Proclamation of Emergency could be made
thereunder. In order to place the matter beyond doubt, the Bill made
it clear in article 352 that the President may issue different Proclamations
on different grounds whether or not there is a Proclamation already in
existence and in operation.
When a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the President
is empowered under article 359 of the Constitution to make an order
suspending the right to move any Court for the enforcement of such
of the rights conferred by Part III as may be mentioned in that order.
It was intended that the powers conferred by this article should be
exercised during an emergency according to the needs of the situation.
On the other hand, article 358 renders the provisions of article 19
automatically inoperative while the Proclamation of Emergency is in
operation, and the power to make any law or to take any executive
action is not restricted by the provisions of that article. The intention
150
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1975, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 22 July 1975, was titled as the
Constitution (Thirty-ninth Amendment) Bill, 1975257. The Bill sought
to amend articles 123, 213, 239B, 352, 356, 359 and 360 of the
Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 23 July 1975 and
passed on the same day with only a formal amendment in clause 1,
changing the short title to The Constitution (Thirty-eighth Amendment)
Act, 1975258. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered
and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 24 July 1975259.
Clauses 2 to 8 of the Bill were adopted in the original form by the
Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
151
152
further states that any law so made shall, to the extent of incompetency,
cease to have effect as soon as the Presidential order ceases to operate,
except as respect things done or omitted to be done before the law so
ceases to have effect.
Section 8 has amended with retrospective effect article 360 of the
Constitution. A new clause (5) has been inserted in the article. By
virtue of this clause, the satisfaction of the President mentioned in
clause (1) pertaining to the declaration of Financial Emergency shall
be final and conclusive and shall not be justiciable on any ground in
any Court.
XXXIX
THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1975260
153
Legislative History
The Constitution (Thirty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1975, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 7 August 1975, was titled as the
154
155
156
XL
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1976265
157
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fortieth Amendment) Act, 1976, when introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 21 May 1976, was titled as the Constitution
(Forty-Second Amendment) Bill, 1976 266. The Bill sought to:
(i) substitute a new article for article 297 and (ii) insert 64 new entries,
i.e. 125 to 188 in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 25 May 1976 and
passed on the same day with only a formal amendment in clause 1,
changing the short-title to The Constitution (Fortieth Amendment)
Act, 1976267. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered
and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 27 May 1976268.
266
267
268
158
XLI
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1976269
159
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-first Amendment) Act, 1976, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 26 August 1976, was titled as the
Constitution (Forty-third Amendment) Bill, 1976270. The Bill sought to
amend article 316 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 30 August 1976 and
passed271 on the same day with a formal amendment replacing the
word Forty-third by the word Forty-first in clause 1. The Bill, as
passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed272 by the Rajya
Sabha on 1 September 1976.
270
271
272
160
XLII
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1976273
161
162
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, when
introduced in Lok Sabha on 1 September 1976, was titled as the
Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1976274. The Bill sought
to: (i) amend the Preamble and articles 31C, 39, 55, 74, 77, 81, 82, 83,
100, 102, 105, 118, 145, 166, 170, 172, 189, 191, 194, 208, 217, 225,
227, 228, 311, 312, 330, 352, 353, 356, 357, 358, 359, 366, 368 and
371F and the Seventh Schedule; (ii) substitute new articles for articles
103, 150, 192 and 226 and (iii) insert new Parts IVA and XIVA and
articles 31D, 32A, 39A, 43A, 48A, 131A, 139A, 144A, 226A, 228A
and 257A in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 28, 29 and 30 October
and 1 and 2 November 1976 and, as amended, passed275 on 2 November
1976. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the
Rajya Sabha on 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10 November and passed on 11 November
1976276.
Clause 1 of the Bill, as introduced in the Lok Sabha, was adopted277
by both the Houses with a formal amendment replacing the word Fortyfourth by the word Forty-second in the short title. Similar amendment
was effected278 in clause 5 of the Bill which sought to insert new
article 31D in the Constitution. Clause 5, as amended by the
Lok Sabha, was adopted279 by the Rajya Sabha on 10 November 1976.
Clause 29 which sought to amend article 170 of the Constitution relating
to composition of the Legislative Assemblies, was adopted280 by the
Lok Sabha on 1 November 1976 with a verbal amendment to the effect
that at the beginning of sub-clause (a) the words, brackets and figure
in clause (2) be added. The clause, as amended, was adopted by the
Rajya Sabha on 10 November 1976281. Clause 51 of the Bill, as
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
163
Amendment of Article 83
Clause 17(1) of the Bill, as introduced in the Lok Sabha, sought to
raise the term of the House of the People from five years to six years
by an amendment to clause (2) of article 83 of the Constitution. The
proposed clause 17(2) read as under:
(2) The amendments made by sub-section (1) shall apply to the
House of the People in existence on the date of coming into force
of this section.
In the aforesaid clause an amendment moved by the Minister of
Law, Justice and Company Affairs, Shri H.R. Gokhale, in the
Lok Sabha seeking replacement of the clause 17(2) by a new clause,
was accepted284. The new clause 17(2) read as under:
(2) The amendments made by sub-section (1) to clause (2) of
article 83 shall apply also to the House of the People in existence
on the date of coming into force of this section without prejudice
to the power of Parliament with respect to the extension of the
duration of that House under the proviso to that clause.
The clause, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted by Rajya
Sabha on 10 November 1976285.
282
283
284
285
L.S.
R.S.
L.S.
R.S.
Deb.,
Deb.,
Deb.,
Deb.,
164
287
L.S. Deb., 1 November 1976, cc. 237-249; R.S. Deb., 10 November 1976,
c. 224.
L.S. Deb., 1 November 1976, c. 234.
165
166
290
291
292
293
294
295
Ibid.
L.S. Deb., 1 November 1976, c. 150.
Ibid., c. 311.
R.S Deb., 10 November 1976, cc. 219-224.
L.S. Deb., 1 November 1976, c. 318.
R.S. Deb., 10 November 1976, cc. 204-209.
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
of the Constitution and to the rules and standing orders regulating the
procedure of Parliament, and immunity from legal action in respect of
anything said or any vote given by a member in Parliament or any
committee thereof), the powers, privileges and immunities of each
House of Parliament and of its members and committees until defined
by law were to be those of the British House of Commons and of its
members and committees at the commencement of the Constitution,
has been amended to provide that the powers, privileges and immunities
aforesaid shall be such as are of the Houses at the commencement of
this amending provision and as may be evolved by such House from
time-to-time. A similar amendment has been made in article 194, which
relates to State Legislatures. (Sections 21 and 34)
The existing scheme under which the constitutional validity of a
Central law could be questioned either before the Supreme Court or
the High Court has been altered. Newly inserted article 131A has
vested the Supreme Court with exclusive jurisdiction as regards
determination of the constitutional validity of Central laws. Also, where
the constitutional validity of both a Central law and a State law is
involved, the Supreme Court alone shall have the jurisdiction to
determine the constitutional validity of such laws. (Section 23)
Newly inserted article 144A has made special provisions as to the
disposal by the Supreme Court of questions relating to validity of laws.
The minimum number of Judges of Supreme Court for determining
any question as to the constitutional validity of a Central law or a State
law shall be seven. A Central law or a State law shall not be declared
to be constitutionally invalid unless not less than two-thirds of the
Judges hearing the case hold the same to be constitutionally invalid.
(Section 25)
Newly inserted article 139A has provided that where cases involving
the same or substantially the same questions of law of general
importance are pending before the Supreme Court and one or more
High Courts, on an application made by the Attorney-General the
Supreme Court may withdraw the cases before the High Court or
High Courts to itself for disposal. Further, under the new article 139A,
the Supreme Court is empowered to transfer any case, appeal or other
proceedings from one High Court to another if it is expedient to meet
the ends of justice. (Section 24)
174
175
176
177
178
179
The Act has inserted certain new entries and amended certain entries
in the Lists of the Seventh Schedule and transposed certain entries of
subjects in certain entries from one List to another. In List IIState
List
(a) Entry 1 Public order (but not including the use of naval,
military or air forces or any other armed forces of the Union)
has been amended as Public order (but not including the use
of any naval, military or air force or any other armed forces
of the Union or of any other force subject to the control of the
Union or of any contingent or unit thereof) in aid of the civil
power.
(2) Entry 2 Police, including railway and village police has
been amended as Police (including railway and village police)
subject to the provisions of Entry 2A of List I. New Entry 2A
inserted by this Act in List IUnion Listis deployment of
any armed force of the Union or any other force subject to the
control of the Union or any contingent or unit thereof in any
State in aid of the civil power; powers, jurisdiction, privileges
and liabilities of the members of such forces while on such
deployment.
The entries or subjects which have been transposed from List II
State Listto List IIIConcurrent Listare: (1) Administration of
justice, constitution and organisation of all Courts except the Supreme
Court and the High Courts; (2) Education; (3) Weights and measures
except establishment of standards; (4) Forests; and (5) Protection of
wild animals and birds. New Entry 20A added in List III is Population
control and family planning. Taxes on advertisements broadcast by
radio and television have also, besides taxes on advertisements published
in newspapers, been inserted in Entry 55 of the List II. (Section 57)
Under section 59, the President had been empowered to make, by
order, necessary provisions, including any adaptation or modification
of any provision of the Constitution, within two years from the date of
his assent to this Act, for the purpose of removing the difficulties in
giving effect to the provisions of the Constitution as amended by this
Act. Every such order made by the President shall be laid before each
House of Parliament.
180
XLIII
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1977300
181
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-third) Amendment Act, 1977, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 16 December 1977, was titled as the
Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1977301. The Bill sought
to amend articles 145, 228 and 366, and omit articles 31D, 32A, 131A,
144A, 226A and 228A of the Constitution.
301
182
183
XLIV
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1978305
184
185
186
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 15 May 1978, was titled as the
Constitution (Forty-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1978306. The Bill sought
to: (i) amend articles 19, 22, 30, 31A, 31C, 38, 74, 77, 83, 105, 123,
132, 133, 134, 139A, 150, 166, 172, 194, 213, 217, 225, 226, 227,
239B, 329, 352, 356, 358, 359, 360, 366, 368 and 371F and the Seventh
and Ninth Schedules to the Constitution; (ii) substitute new articles for
articles 71, 103 and 192; (iii) insert new articles 134A, 361A and
Chapter IV in Part XIII of the Constitution and (iv) omit articles 31,
257A and 329A and Part XIVA of the Constitution and sections 18, 19,
21, 22, 31, 32, 34, 35, 58 and 59 of the Constitution (Forty-second
Amendment) Act, 1976.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
21, 22 and 23 August and, as amended, passed on 23 August 1978307.
The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered by the
Rajya Sabha on 28, 29, 30 and 31 August and passed with amendments
on 31 August 1978308. The Bill, as amended by the Rajya Sabha, was
considered by the Lok Sabha on 6 and 7 December 1978. Amendments
made by the Rajya Sabha were agreed to by the Lok Sabha on
306
307
308
187
188
189
190
191
192
(c) for doing away with the power of Parliament to provide for
preventive detention without reference to an Advisory Board
for a period longer than the maximum period laid down in
this regard. (Section 3)
The new article substituted for article 71 restored the jurisdiction
of the Supreme Court to enquire into doubts and disputes in respect of
the election of a President or Vice-President. (Section 10)
Article 74(1), which provides that the President will act in
accordance with the advice of the Council of Ministers, has been
amended to provide that the President may require the Council of
Ministers to reconsider any such advice but that the President will
have to act in accordance with the advice tendered after such
reconsideration. (Section 11)
Clause (4) of article 77 and clause (4) of article 166, relating
respectively to the Government of India and the State Governments,
have been omitted, thus restoring the power of Courts to compel
production of rules relating to the transaction of business of the Union
and the State Governments. (Sections 12 and 23)
Articles 83 and 172, relating respectively to the House of the People
and the State Legislative Assemblies, have been amended to restore
the terms of the House of the People and the State Legislative
Assemblies to five years. (Sections 13 and 24)
Articles 103 and 192, relating respectively to decisions on questions
as to disqualification of members of Parliament and of State Legislatures,
have been substituted to provide that the decision on the question as
to disqualification, by the President in the case of a member of
Parliament and by the Governor in the case of a member of a State
Legislature, shall be in accordance with the opinion of the Election
Commission. (Sections 14 and 25)
Articles 105 and 194, relating respectively to the privileges of
Houses of Parliament and of State Legislatures, have been amended to
omit the reference to the British House of Commons in these articles
and to provide instead that the powers, privileges and immunities of
the House and of the members and committees thereof will be those
193
194
195
196
197
XLV
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1980332
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1980 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 23 January 1980333. The Bill sought to amend
article 334 of the Constitution relating to reservation of seats for the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and special representation
of the Anglo-Indian community in the House of the People and in the
Legislative Assemblies of the States.
332
333
Bill No.1 of 1980; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Shri Zail Singh on 23 January 1980; Debated, Lok Sabha: 24 January 1980;
Rajya Sabha: 25 January 1980; Ratified as per requirement of proviso to
article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following State Legislatures, namely,
Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka,
Kerala, Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura and West Bengal;
Presidents Assent: 14 April 1980; Date of Gazette Notification: 14 April 1980;
Date of Commencement: 25 January 1980.
L.S. Deb., 23 January 1980, cc. 54-55.
198
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 24 January 1980 and
passed on the same day in the original form334. The Bill, as passed by
the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
25 January 1980335.
XLVI
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1982336
199
200
201
202
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1981 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 3 April 1981337. The Bill sought to
amend articles 269, 286 and 366 and the Seventh Schedule to the
Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 13 and 14 July and
passed by that House338 on 14 July 1982 with formal amendment in
337
338
203
204
XLVII
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1984342
205
been included in the Ninth Schedule. The Sixth Five-Year Plan contained
an assurance that necessary action would be taken to bring before
Parliament land reforms Acts not yet included in the Ninth Schedule
to the Constitution for immediate inclusion in the said Schedule and
that the same would be done in the case of future Acts without delay
so that these laws are protected from challenge in courts. The State
Governments of Assam, Bihar, Haryana, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh
and West Bengal and the Administration of the Union territory of Goa,
Daman and Diu suggested the inclusion of some of their Acts relating
to land reforms in the Ninth Schedule. Some of these Acts were by
way of amendments to Acts already included in the Ninth Schedule.
The Bill sought to include in the Ninth Schedule such of these Acts in
order to prevent them from being adversely affected by litigation.
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-seventh Amendment) Act, 1984, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 19 August 1983, was titled as the
Constitution (Forty-eighth Amendment) Bill, 1983343. The Bill sought
to amend the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 22 and 23 August
and passed by that House 344 on 23 August 1984 with formal
amendments345 changing the short title to the Constitution (Forty-seventh
Amendment) Act, 1984 and replacing the word Thirty-fourth by the
word Thirty-fifth in the Enacting Formula. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
25 August 1984346.
206
XLVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1984347
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1984, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 17 August 1984, was titled as the
Constitution (Fiftieth Amendment) Bill, 1984348. The Bill sought to
amend article 356 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 23 August 1984 and
passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the short
title to The Constitution (Forty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1984349. The
347
348
349
207
Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the
Rajya Sabha on 25 August 1984350.
XLIX
THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1984351
Legislative History
The Constitution (Forty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1984, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 17 August 1984, was titled as the
350
351
208
L
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1984355
209
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fiftieth Amendment) Act, 1984, when introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 22 August 1984, was titled as the Constitution
(Fifty-second Amendment) Bill, 1984356. The Bill sought to substitute
a new article for the existing article 33 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 23 August 1984 and,
as amended, passed on the same day357. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
25 August 1984358.
During consideration of the Bill, in clause 2 an amendment moved
by the Minister of Home Affairs, Shri P.V. Narasimha Rao in the
Lok Sabha was accepted. The amendment was moved with a view to
omit sub-clause (c) and make consequential changes in sub-clause (d)
and (e) of the article sought to be substituted for the existing article 33
of the Constitution. The clause, as amended, was adopted by the
Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 23 and 25 August 1984,
respectively359.
356
357
358
359
210
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha and the
Rajya Sabha on 23 and 25 August 1984 respectively360, with a formal
amendment changing the short title to The Constitution (Fiftieth
Amendment) Act, 1984.
LI
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1984361
211
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-first Amendment) Act, 1984 titled as the
Constitution (Fifty-third Amendment) Bill, 1984 was introduced in the
Lok Sabha on 23 August 1984362, after a motion for suspension of
rule 338 of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha
in its application to the Bill had been adopted by the House. It sought
to amend articles 330 and 332 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 23 August 1984 and
passed on the same day only with a formal amendment in clause 1
changing the short title to the Constitution (Fifty-first Amendment)
Act, 1984363. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered
and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 25 August 1984364.
Clauses 2 and 3 of the Bill were adopted in the original form both
by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 23 and 25 August 1984,
respectively365.
363
364
365
L.S. Deb., 23 August 1984, c. 314. See also the Constitution (Forty-seventh
Amendment) Bill 1982: for Legislative History in Chapter III and for Text in
Annexure (B).
Ibid., cc. 651-660.
R.S. Deb., 25 August 1984, cc. 256-260.
L.S. Deb., 23 August 1984, cc. 630-641; R.S. Deb., 25 August 1984,
cc. 241-251.
212
LII
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1985366
Bill No. 22 of 1985; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Law and
Justice, Shri A.K. Sen on 24 January 1985; Debated; Lok Sabha: 30 January
1985; Rajya Sabha: 31 January 1985; Presidents Assent: 15 February 1985;
Date of Gazette Notification: 15 February 1985; Date of Commencement:
1 March 1985.
213
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-second Amendment) Bill, 1985 was
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 24 January 1985367. The Bill sought
to: (i) amend articles 101, 102, 190 and 191 and (ii) insert a new Tenth
Schedule in the Constitution incorporating provisions as to
disqualification for a member of either House of Parliament or of a
Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State, on the ground
of defection.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 30 January 1985 and
passed with some modifications on the same day368. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
31 January 1985369.
During consideration of clause 6 of the Bill, which sought to insert
a new Tenth Schedule in the Constitution, the amendments moved by
367
368
369
214
the Minister of Law and Justice, Shri A.K. Sen, in the Lok Sabha were
accepted by the House370. Sub-para (1) (c) of para 2 of the new Tenth
Schedule which was sought to be omitted read as under:
(c) if he has been expelled from such political party in accordance
with the procedure established by the constitution, rules or
regulations of such political party.
The other amendment in Para 2 of the new Schedule was that the
following words be added in sub-para 1 (b) thereof;
and such voting or abstention has not been condoned by such
political party, person or authority within fifteen days from the date
of such voting or abstention.
A new clause sought to be substituted for clause (a) of Para 3 in
the new Schedule read as under:
(a) he shall not be disqualified under sub-paragraph (1) of
Paragraph 2 on the following ground:
(i) that he has voluntarily given up his membership of his original
political party; or
(ii) that he has voted or abstained from voting in such House
contrary to any direction issued by such party or by any person
or authority authorised by it in that behalf without obtaining
the prior permission of such party, person or authority and
such voting or abstention has not been condoned by such
party, person or authority within fifteen days from the date of
such voting or abstentation; and
The original clause (a) of Para 3 read as follows:
(a) he shall not be disqualified under sub-paragraph (1) of
Paragraph 2 on the ground that he has voluntarily given up his
membership of his original political party or has voted, or
abstained from voting, in such House contrary to any direction
issued by such party or by any person or authority authorised
by such party in that behalf without obtaining the prior
permission of such party; and
370
215
216
217
LIII
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1986372
Bill No. 88 of 1986; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Shri Buta Singh on 4 August 1986; Debated, Lok Sabha: 5 August 1986;
Rajya Sabha: 7 August 1986; Presidents Assent: 14 August 1986; Date of Gazette
Notification: 14 August 1986; Date of Commencement: 20 February 1987.
218
The above provision shall not, however, apply in the case of Central
Acts which were in force in the Union territory of Mizoram immediately
before the date on which the Constitution (Amendment) Act came into
force.
The Memorandum also provided that the Legislative Assembly of
the proposed new State of Mizoram shall consist of not less than forty
members.
As the matters specified in paragraphs 2 and 3 are peculiar to the
proposed new State of Mizoram, provisions with respect thereto have
to be made in the Constitution itself. This Bill, accordingly, sought to
amend the Constitution to provide for the aforesaid matters. A separate
Bill for the establishment of the new State relatable to article 2 is also
being introduced.
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-third Amendment) Bill, 1986 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 4 August 1986373. The Bill sought to insert a new
article 371G in the Constitution for making special provision with
respect to the State of Mizoram.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 5 August 1986 and
passed on the same day in the original form374. The Bill, as passed by
the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
7 August 1986375.
219
customary law, and (iv) ownership and transfer of land shall apply to
the State of Mizoram unless the Legislative Assembly of the State by
a resolution so decides. However, this provision shall not apply to any
Central Act in force in the Union territory of Mizoram immediately
before the commencement of this Act. The Legislative Assembly of
the State of Mizoram shall consist of not less than forty members.
(Section 2)
LIV
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1986376
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
5,000
4,000
4,000
3,500
per
per
per
per
month
month
month
month
The salaries had remained static since 1950 despite high inflation
and price rise that had taken place during all these years. The Joint
Conference of Chief Justices, Chief Ministers and Law Ministers of
the States held on 31st August and 1st September 1985, inter alia,
discussed and recommended improvement in service conditions of
Judges including increase in their salaries, not only to minimise the
inflationary pressures on them but also to attract best talents in the
country to man the judicial posts.
376
Bill No. 95 of 1986; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of State in the
Ministry of Law and Justice, Shri H.R. Bhardwaj on 8 August 1986; Debated,
Lok Sabha: 12 August 1986; Rajya Sabha: 14 August 1986; Ratified as per
requirement of proviso to article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following
State Legislatures, namely, Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar,
Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra,
Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu,
Tripura, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal; Presidents Assent: 14 March 1987;
Date of Gazette Notification: 17 March 1987; Date of Commencement: 1 April
1986.
220
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
221
LV
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1986383
Bill No. 145 of 1986; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Shri Buta Singh on 5 December 1986; Debated, Lok Sabha: 8 December 1986;
Rajya Sabha: 9 December 1986; Presidents Assent: 23 December 1986; Date
of Gazette Notification: 23 December 1986; Date of Commencement: 20 February
1987.
222
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-fifth Amendment) Bill 1986, was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 5 September 1986384. The Bill sought to insert a
new article 371H in the Constitution providing for special provision
with respect to the State of Arunachal Pradesh.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 8 December 1986
and passed on the same day in the original form385. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
9 December 1986386.
223
inter alia that the Governor of the State shall have special responsibility
with respect to law and order in the State. However, if the President
on receipt of a report from the Governor or otherwise is satisfied that
it is no longer necessary for the Governor to have such special
responsibility, he may by order direct that the Governor shall cease to
have such responsibility with effect from such date as may be specified
in the order. A provision has also been made that the Legislative
Assembly of the State shall consist of not less than thirty members.
(Section 2)
LVI
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1987387
387
Bill No. 54 of 1987; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs,
Shri Buta Singh on 8 May 1987; Debated, Lok Sabha: 11 May 1987;
Rajya Sabha: 12 May 1987; Presidents Assent: 23 May 1987; Date of Gazette
Notification: 25 May 1987; Date of Commencement: 30 May 1987.
224
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-sixth Amendment) Act, 1987, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 8 May 1987, was titled as the
Constitution (Fifty-seventh Amendment) Bill, 1987388. The Bill sought
to insert a new article 371-I in the Constitution providing for special
provision with respect to the State of Goa.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 11 May 1987 and,
as amended, passed on the same day389. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 12 May
1987390.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with a formal
amendment replacing the word Fifty-seventh by the word Fiftysixth391. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted by the
Rajya Sabha on 12 May 1987392.
388
389
390
391
392
225
LVII
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1987393
226
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-seventh Amendment) Act, 1987, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 26 August 1987, was titled as the
Constitution (Fifty-eighth Amendment) Bill, 1987394. The Bill sought
to amend article 332 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 28 August 1987 and,
as amended, passed on the same day395. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
31 August 1987396.
Clauses 1 and 2 of the Bill were adopted by the Lok Sabha with
formal Amendments replacing the word Fifty-eighth by the words
Fifty-seventh397. Clauses 1 and 2, as amended by the Lok Sabha,
were adopted by the Rajya Sabha on 31 August 1987398.
394
395
396
397
398
227
LVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1987399
228
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1987, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27 February 1987, was titled as the
Constitution (Fifty-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1987.400 The Bill sought
to: (i) amend the heading of Part XXII and (ii) insert new article 394A
in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 24 November 1987
and, as amended, passed on the same day401. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 26 November
1987402.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with formal
amendment replacing the word Fifty-sixth by the word Fiftyeighth403. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted by
the Rajya Sabha on 26 November 1987404.
400
401
402
403
404
229
LIX
THE CONSTITUTION (FIFTY-NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1988405
230
231
Legislative History
The Constitution (Fifty-ninth Amendment) Bill, 1988 was introduced
in the Rajya Sabha on 14 March 1988406. The Bill sought to: (i) amend
article 356 and (ii) insert a new article 359A in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 15 March 1988
and, as amended, passed on the same day407. The Bill, as passed by the
Rajya Sabha, was considered and passed by the Lok Sabha on
23 March 1988408.
During consideration of clause 3 of the Bill as introduced in the
Rajya Sabha, amendments to following provisions were moved409 by
Shri Buta Singh, which in relation to the State of Punjab sought to:
(i) substitute the following for the opening portion of clause (1)
of article 352:
If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists whereby:
(a) the security of India or of any part of the territory thereof is
threatened, whether by war or external aggression or armed
rebellion; or
(b) the integrity of India is threatened by internal disturbance in
any part of the territory of India,
he may, by Proclamation, make a declaration to that effect in
respect of the whole of India or of such part of the territory
thereof as may be specified in the Proclamation.;
(ii) insert in the Explanation to article 352, after the words, armed
rebellion the words or that the integrity of India is threatened
by internal disturbances in any part of the territory of India.; and
(iii) insert in article 358(1), after the words or by external
aggression, the words or by armed rebellion, or that the integrity
of India is threatened by internal disturbance in any part of the
territory of India.
406
407
408
409
232
To make it more clear that the Bill applies only to the State of
Punjab, by way of abundant caution the amendments proposed to replace
the words any part of the territory of India by the words the whole
or any part of the territory of Punjab, in all the three places where
these words occur. The word India was proposed to be replaced by
the word Punjab for the purpose of specifying the territory in respect
of which the declaration could be made by the President under the new
article 359A. The amendments were accepted by the House410.
Clause 3 of the Bill, as so amended, was adopted by the Rajya Sabha
and Lok Sabha on 15 and 23 March 1988, respectively411.
Ibid., c. 238.
Ibid., c. 244; L.S. Deb., 23 March 1988, c. 562.
233
LX
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1988412
Bill No. 100 of 1988; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of State in the
Department of Revenue in the Ministry of Finance, Shri A.K. Panja on
22 August 1988; Debated, Lok Sabha: 30 November 1988; Rajya Sabha: 5 and
6 December 1988; Presidents Assent: 20 December 1988; Date of Gazette
Notification: 20 December 1988; Date of Commencement : 20 December 1988.
234
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixtieth Amendment) Bill, 1988, was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 22 August 1988413. The Bill sought to amend
article 276 of the Constitution relating to taxes on professions, trades,
callings and employments.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 30 November 1988
and passed on the same day in the original form414. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
6 December 1988415.
LXI
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1988416
235
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-first Amendment) Act, 1988, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 13 December 1988, was titled as the
Constitution (Sixty-second Amendment) Bill, 1988417. The Bill sought
to amend article 326 of the Constitution relating to election to the
House of the People and to the Legislative Assemblies of States based
on adult suffrage.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 15 December 1988
and, as amended, passed on the same day418. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
20 December 1988419.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with a formal
amendment replacing the word Sixty-second, by the word Sixtyfirst420. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted by the
Rajya Sabha on 20 December 1988421.
236
LXII
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1989422
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-second Amendment) Bill, 1989 was
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 20 December 1989423. The Bill
sought to amend article 334 of the Constitution relating to the reservation
of seats for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and the
representation of the Anglo-Indian community by nomination in the
Lok Sabha and in the Legislative Assemblies of the State.
422
423
Bill No. 26 of 1989; Introduced in Rajya Sabha by the Minister of Labour and
Welfare, Shri Ram Vilas Paswan on 20 December 1989; Debated, Rajya Sabha:
21 December 1989; Lok Sabha: 22 and 26 December 1989; Ratified as per
requirement of proviso to article 368(2) of the Constitution by the following
State Legislatures, namely, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh,
Karnataka, Kerala, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Orissa, Rajasthan, Sikkim,
Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal; Presidents Assent: 25 January
1990; Date of Gazette Notification: 25 January 1990; Date of Commencement:
20 December 1989.
R.S. Deb., 20 December 1989, c. 32.
237
LXIII
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1989426
238
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-third Amendment) Bill, 1989 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 29 December 1989427. The Bill sought to repeal
the Constitution (Fifty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1988 making amendment
to article 356 and insertion of new article 359A in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 29 December 1989
and as amended, passed on the same day428. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
29 December 1989429.
Clauses 2 and 3 of the Bill were adopted in the original form by
the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha430.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with an
amendment replacing the words It shall come into force on such date
as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
appoint by the words It shall come into force with immediate
effect431. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted by the
Rajya Sabha432.
431
432
239
LXIV
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1990433
240
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1990, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 4 April 1990 was titled as the
Constitution (Sixty-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1990434. The Bill sought to
amend article 356 of the Constitution to provide that the Proclamation
issued by the President thereunder with respect to the State of Punjab
shall remain in force for a period of three years and months from the
date of the issue of Proclamation.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 5 April 1990 and, as
amended, passed on the same day435. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 10 April
1990436.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with a formal
amendment replacing the word Sixty-fifth by the word
Sixty-fourth437. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted
by the Rajya Sabha on 10 April 1990438.
241
LXV
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1990439
242
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-fifth Amendment) Act, 1990, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 23 May 1990, was titled as the
Constitution (Sixty-eighth Amendment) Bill, 1990440. The Bill sought
to amend article 338 of the Constitution for a more effective arrangement
in respect of the constitutional safeguards for Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 28, 29 and 30 May
1990 and, as amended, passed on the same day441. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
31 May 1990442.
During consideration of clause 2 of the Bill as introduced in the
Lok Sabha, following amendments were moved443 by Shri Ram Vilas
Paswan, seeking:
(i) substitution of the word five for the word three in
clause 2(b)(2) relating to the constitution of the National
Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes;
(ii) substitution of the words inquire into for the word examine
in sub-clause 5(b) of clause 2(b);
(iii) insertion of the following new sub-clause in clause 2(b)(5):
(c) to participate and advise on the planning process of
socio-economic development of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes and to evaluate the progress of their
development under the Union and any State;
440
441
442
443
243
244
245
LXVI
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1990447
Bill No. 53 of 1990; Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Deputy Prime Minister and
Minister of Agriculture, Shri Devi Lal on 19 April 1990; Debated, Lok Sabha:
29 and 30 May, 1990; Rajya Sabha: 1 June 1990; Presidents Assent: 7 June
1990; Date of Gazette Notification: 8 June 1990; Date of Commencement:
7 June 1990.
246
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1990 was introduced
in the Lok Sabha on 19 April 1990448. The Bill sought to amend the
Ninth Schedule to the Constitution to include more State enactments
relating to land reforms.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 29 and 30 May 1990
and, as amended, passed on the same day449. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 1 June
1990450.
During consideration of clause 2 of the Bill as introduced in the
Lok Sabha, an amendment to entry No. 208 was moved451 by
Shri Upendra Nath Verma, Minister of State for Rural Development in
the Ministry of Agriculture, to omit the following words, figures and
brackets:
(Chapter VII-A-Section 49AA to 49Q)
The amendment was accepted by the House. Clause 2 of the Bill,
as so amended, was adopted by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on
30 May and 1 June 1990, respectively452.
247
LXVII
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1990453
248
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-seventh Amendment) Act, 1990, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 4 October 1990, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1990454. The Bill sought
to amend clause 4 of article 356 of the Constitution to provide for
extension of Proclamation issued by the President on 11 May 1987
with respect to the State of Punjab for a further period of six months,
i.e. upto a total period of four years.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 4 October 1990 and,
as amended, passed on the same day455. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 4 October
1990456.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with a formal
amendment replacing the word Seventy-sixth by the word Sixtyseventh457. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted by
the Rajya Sabha on 4 October 1990458.
454
455
456
457
458
L.S. Deb., 4
Ibid., c. 59.
R.S. Deb., 4
L.S. Deb., 4
R.S. Deb., 4
249
LXVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1991459
250
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1991, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 11 March 1991, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1991460. The Bill sought
to amend clause (4) of article 356 of the Constitution to provide for
extension of Proclamation issued by the President on 11 May 1987
with respect to the State of Punjab for a further period of one year, i.e.
upto a total period of five years.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 11 March 1991 and,
as amended, passed on the same day461. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
12 March 1991462.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with a formal
amendment replacing the word Seventy-fifth by the word Sixtyeighth463. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted by
the Rajya Sabha on 12 March 1991464.
251
LXIX
THE CONSTITUTION (SIXTY-NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1991465
Legislative History
The Constitution (Sixty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1991 when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 16 December 1991, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1991466. The Bill sought
465
466
252
253
254
LXX
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1992473
255
Legislative History
The Bill of the Constitution (Seventieth Amendment) Act, 1992,
when introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 3 April 1992, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-sixth Amendment) Bill 1992474. The Bill sought
to amend articles 54 and 55 of the Constitution to include the
National Capital territory of Delhi and the Union territory of Pondicherry
in the electoral college to elect the President of India.
The Bill was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 29 April 1992 and,
as amended, passed on the same day475. The Bill was passed by the
Lok Sabha on 7 May 1992476.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Rajya Sabha with formal
amendment replacing the word Seventy-sixth by the word Seventyfirst477. Clause 1, as amended by Rajya Sabha, was further amended
by Lok Sabha to substitute the word Seventy-first by the word
Seventieth478 and was adopted by the House on 7 May 1992479.
474
475
476
477
478
479
256
LXXI
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1992480
257
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-first Amendment) Act, 1992, when
introduced in Lok Sabha on 20 August 1992, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-eighth Amendment) Bill, 1992481. The Bill sought
the inclusion of Konkani, Manipuri and Nepali languages in the Eighth
Schedule of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by Lok Sabha on 20 August 1992 and, as
amended, passed on the same day482. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
20 August 1992483.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with
formal amendment replacing the word Seventy-eighth by the word
Seventy-first484. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted
by the Rajya Sabha on 20 August 1992485.
LXXII
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1992486
258
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-second Amendment) Act, 1992, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 20 December 1991, was titled as
the Constitution (Seventy-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1991 487. The
Bill sought to amend article 332 of the Constitution to provide for
487
259
488
489
490
491
260
LXXIII
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1992492
261
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 16 September 1991, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-second Amendment) Bill, 1991493. The Bill sought
to insert a new PartPart IX and Eleventh Schedule in the Constitution
relating to the constitution of Panchayats at the village, intermediate
493
262
Article 243
Clause 2 of the Bill, as introduced in the Lok Sabha, did not provide
definition of Gram Sabha in article 243 which relates to definitions.
The Joint Committee felt that the definition of the expression Gram
Sabha which has been provided in article 243A should be provided in
article 243 since all other expressions have been defined in this article.
A new clause (b) relating to the definition of Gram Sabha was
accordingly inserted in article 243 and clauses (b) to (f) were renumbered as clauses (c) to (g) by the Joint Committee.
On 22 December 1992, an amendment was moved by the Minister
of State for Rural Development, Shri G. Venkat Swamy to omit the
word revenue from the definition of district in article 243(a)499.
Article 243, in this amended form, was adopted by the Lok Sabha
and the Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992500, respectively.
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
263
Article 243A
Article 243A of the Constitution (Seventy-second) Amendment Bill,
as introduced in the House, proposed that a Gram Sabha may exercise
such powers at the village level as the Legislature of a State may, by
law, provide. However, the Joint Committee felt that Gram Sabha cannot
exercise any powers and that, at best, it can perform certain functions,
the details of which can be laid down by the Legislature of a State. The
Committee, accordingly, revised this clause. When the clause came up
for consideration before the House, the Minister of State for Rural
Development, Shri G. Venkat Swamy, moved an amendment seeking
substitution of words of clause 243A as follows:
A Gram Sabha may exercise such powers and perform such
functions at the village level as the Legislature of a State, may, by
law, provide.
With this amendment, article 243A was adopted by the Lok Sabha
and the Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992, respectively501.
Article 243B
Article 243B of the Bill, as introduced, proposed that there shall be
constituted in every State, Panchayats at the village level in accordance
with the provisions of this Part. For the constitution of Panchayats at
the intermediate level or the district level, the Legislature of a State
may, by law, provide. The Joint Committee noted that there is a wide
diversity in the number of tiers of Panchayats existing in different
Statesmajority of the bigger States having three-tier system and even
in that there are structural differences in States like Karnataka,
Tamil Nadu and Assam. The Committee, therefore, suggested that a
common and uniform three-tier system of Panchayats may be adopted
throughout the country within one year from the date of commencement
of this Act. During consideration of this clause by the Lok Sabha, the
Minister of a State for Rural Development, Shri G. Venkat Swamy,
moved an amendment seeking substitution of article 243B as follows:
1. There shall be constituted in every State, Panchayats at the
village, intermediate and district levels in accordance with the
provisions of this Part.
501
Ibid.
264
Article 243C
Clauses (2) and (3) of article 243C, as introduced in the Bill,
provided that all the seats in a Panchayat at the village level and
intermediate level shall be filled by direct elections whereas those of
district level shall be filled in such manner as the State Legislature
may, by law, provide. But the Joint Committee opined that directly
elected persons have an inherent strength of having been elected by the
people whereas indirect elections would lead to various manipulative
practices. The Committee, therefore, recommended that all seats in a
Panchayat at all levels should be filled in by direct elections and
clause 3 which dealt with filling of seats in the Panchayats at district
level be omitted. These clauses, as amended by the Joint Committee,
were accepted by the Lok Sabha on 22 December 1992.
Clause (4) of article 243C relating to representation of Chairpersons
of Panchayats, as introduced, reads as follows:
243(C)(4): The Legislature of a State may, by law, provide for the
representation in such manner and subject to such conditions as
may be specified in such law:
(a) of the Chairpersons of the Panchayats at the village levelin
the Panchyats at the intermediate level, or, in the case of a
State not having Panchayats at the intermediate level, in
Panchayats at the district level;
(b) of the Chairpersons of the Panchayats at the intermediate level,
if any, in the Panchayats at the district level, if any;
(c) the members of the House of People and the members of the
Legislative Assembly of the State representing constituencies
which comprise wholly or partly a Panchayat area at a level
other than the village level in such Panchayat.
502
Ibid.
265
The Joint Committee also agreed to clauses (a), (b) and (c) as
introduced but omitted the words or, in the case of a State not having
Panchayats at the intermediate level, in the Panchayats at the district
level from clause 4(a) of article 243C. But when this clause came up
for consideration in the House, by an amendment moved by the Minister
of State for Rural Development, Shri G. Venkat Swamy, the position
was reversed to the one as introduced in the Bill. Clause 4 as introduced
was re-numbered as clause 3 due to omission of original clause 3.
The Committee further recommended insertion of a new
sub-clause (d) in article 243C(4) which provides for the representation
of the members of the Council of States and the members of Legislative
Council of the State, where they are registered as electors, within:
(i) a Panchayat area at the intermediate level, in Panchayat at the
intermediate level;
(ii) a Panchayat area at the district level, in Panchayat at the
district level.
This sub-clause, as recommended by the Joint Committee, was
accepted by the House.
The Bill, as introduced, provided that only the Chairperson and
directly elected members of a Panchayat have the right to vote in the
meetings of the Panchayat. The Committee, however, opined that all
members of a Panchayat, irrespective of their being chosen directly or
indirectly, should be given the right to vote in the meetings of the
Panchayat for the smooth functioning of these bodies. The Joint
Committee recommended that the provisions of clauses (5) and (6) of
article 243C should be clubbed together and incorporated as clause (4).
All these recommendations were approved by the Lok Sabha also.
Clause (7) of article 243C, as introduced, provided that the
Chairperson of a Panchayat at the village or intermediate level shall be
chosen by direct election and that of the district level shall be chosen
by indirect election. The Joint Committee recommended that the
Chairperson of a Panchayat at the village level only should be chosen
by direct election and that of intermediate level or district level should
be chosen by indirect election. During the consideration of this clause,
an amendment was moved by Minister of State for Rural Development,
266
Article 243E
Clause (2) of article 243E of the Bill as introduced in the
Lok Sabha, reads as follows:
243E. (2) Where a Panchayat is dissolved before the expiration of
its duration, an election to constitute the Panchayat must be
completed as soon as may be, and in any case, before the expiration
of a period of six months from the date of such dissolution:
Provided that where the remainder of the period for which the
dissolved Panchayat would have continued is less than six months,
it shall not be necessary to hold any election under this clause for
constituting the Panchayat.
Keeping in view the fact that Panchayats at any level can be
superseded for indefinite periods or they can be dissolved and in certain
cases elections to these institutions have not been held for long periods,
the Committee recommended that the elections to these bodies must be
completed before the expiration of their duration of five years. Similarly,
in case a Panchayat is dissolved before the expiration of its duration,
election to constitute a new Panchayat must be completed before the
expiry of a period of six months from the date on which it was dissolved.
503
Ibid.
267
The Committee also felt that any State should not carry out any
amendment which should have the effect of causing dissolution of
Panchayats which are functioning immediately before such an
amendment, before the expiration of their duration of five years.
These recommendations of the Joint Committee were adopted by
the Lok Sabha on 22 December 1992 and, accordingly, two new
clauses (2) and (4) were inserted and existing clause (2) was amended504
and re-numbered as clause (3).
Article 243F
Article 243F of the Bill, as introduced, deals with disqualifications
for membership in a Panchayat, and gives in detail the grounds for
such a disqualification:
243F(1) A person shall be disqualified for being chosen, as and for
being, a member of a Panchayat:
(a) If he holds any office of profit under the Government or the
Government of any State or a Panchayat, other than an office
declared by the Legislature of the State, by law, not to
disqualify its holder;
(b) If he is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a Competent
Court;
(c) If he is an undischarged insolvent;
(d) If he is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the
citizenship of a foreign State or is under any acknowledgement
or allegiance or adherence to a foreign State;
(e) If he is so disqualified by or under any law for the time being
in force for the purposes of elections to the Legislature of the
State concerned;
(f) If he is so disqualified by or under any law made by the
Legislature of the State.
504
For Text of the provision, see the Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act,
1992, article 243C in Annexure (A)
268
Article 243K
As provided for in the Bill, as introduced, elections to the Panchayat
should be held under the superintendence, direction and control of the
Chief Electoral Officer of the State. The Joint Committee, however,
recommended that it should be left to the Legislature of a State to
provide for a separate authority for conducting the said elections.
But when the clause came up for consideration in the House,
Minister of State for Rural Development, Shri G. Venkat Swamy moved
an amendment to substitute article 243K as follows:
243K(1) The superintendence, direction and control of the
preparation of electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections
to the Panchayats shall be vested in State Election Commission
consisting of a State Election Commissioner to be appointed by the
Governor.
505
506
L.S. Deb., 22 December 1992, c. 735; R.S. Deb., 23 December 1992, c. 217.
For Text of the provisions, see the Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment)
Act, 1992, article 243F in Annexure (A).
269
Article 243L
Article 243L, which deals with application of Part IX, when
introduced, provided that the President may direct by public notification
that the provisions of this Part shall not apply to any Union territory.
The Joint Committee suggested that this enabling power of the President
should only have the power to apply the said provision to any Union
territory. This recommendation was accepted by the Lok Sabha and the
Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992508, respectively.
Article 243M
Article 243M of the Bill deals with provisions which specify areas
where Part IX shall not apply. When this article came up for
507
508
L.S. Deb., 22 December 1992, c. 735; R.S. Deb., 23 December 1992, c. 217.
Ibid.
270
Other Amendments
In proposed clause 3 of the Bill, providing for addition of Eleventh
Schedule, an amendment was suggested by Minister of State for Rural
509
510
271
L.S.
R.S.
L.S.
R.S.
Deb.,
Deb.,
Deb.,
Deb.,
22
23
22
23
December
December
December
December
1992,
1992,
1992,
1992,
c.
c.
c.
c.
769.
212.
785.
204.
272
273
274
275
LXXIV
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1992515
276
277
278
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 16 September 1991, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Bill, 1991516. The Bill sought
to insert Part IXA and Twelfth Schedule in the Constitution relating to
the constitution and composition of urban local bodies. On a motion
moved in the Lok Sabha on 20 December 1991 and adopted on the
same day517 and concurred in by the Rajya Sabha518 on 21 December
1991, the Bill was referred to a Joint Committee of the two Houses.
The Report of the Joint Committee was presented to the Lok Sabha
on 14 July 1992519. The Committee suggested amendments in some of
the clauses of the Bill as introduced in the House. The Bill, as reported
by the Joint Committee, was considered by the House on 1, 2, 4, 21
and 22 December 1992 and with some modifications, was passed on
22 December 1992520. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was
considered by the Rajya Sabha on 23 December 1992 and passed on
the same day521.
Certain amendments including those recommended by the
Joint Committee were moved and adopted by the House which are
detailed as below:
Article 243P
Article 243P relating to definitions when introduced did not define
the expressions District, Metropolitan area and Panchayat. On
the recommendation of the Joint Committee, three new clauses were
516
517
518
519
520
521
279
Article 243Q
This article, which deals with the constitution of Municipalities,
was approved by the Joint Committee as introduced. But when this
article came up for consideration in the House, an amendment was
moved by the Minister of Urban Development, Smt. Sheila Kaul to
insert a proviso to clause (1) of the article providing that any
Municipality under this clause may not be constituted in such urban
area as may be specified as industrial township and where municipal
services are provided by such an industrial establishment. The article,
as amended, was adopted by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on
22 and 23 December 1992, respectively524.
Article 243R
Article 243R, which deals with composition of Municipalities, was
amended by the Joint Committee to omit clause (1) and re-number
clause (2) as clause (1). Also clauses (3) to (5) were clubbed in the
new clause (2). The Committee further opined that there should be
representation of members of Parliament and of the State Legislatures
in Municipalities. Accordingly, two new sub-clauses (ii) and
(iii) providing for their representation were added in clause (2) of
article 243R.
522
523
524
280
Article 243S
Article 243S, which deals with the constitution and composition of
Committee at ward level or other levels, when introduced did not
specifically provide for their size particularly in relation to the
population. The Joint Committee viewed that within the territorial area
of Municipalities having a population of three lakh or more, a Wards
Committee should be constituted. Further, the Committee recommended
that a member representing a Ward in a Municipality should be a
member of Wards Committee. Also, where a Wards Committee consists
of one Ward, the member representing that Ward in the Municipality
should be the Chairperson of the Wards Committee. However, where
a Wards Committee consists of two or more Wards, one of the members
representing such Wards in the Municipality should be elected by the
members of the Wards Committee to be its Chairperson. The Joint
Committee further recommended that nothing contained in the
provisions of this article should prevent the Legislature of a State from
making any provision for the constitution of Committees in addition to
the Wards Committee.
These recommendations of Joint Committee were adopted by the
Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992526,
respectively.
Article 243T
Article 243T to the Bill, when introduced in the Lok Sabha, read
as follows:
243T. The provisions of articles 243D (except the proviso to
clause (4), 243E [except clause (3)], 243F, 243H, 243-I, 243K,
243L, 243N and 243-O shall, so far as may be, apply in relation
to Municipalities as they apply in relation to Panchayats.
525
526
281
Article 243U
After 243T, the Joint Committee recommended addition of a new
article 243U with a view to making provisions relating to the duration
of the Municipalities. It read as follows:
243U. (1) Every Municipality, unless sooner dissolved under any
law for the time being in force, shall continue for five years from
the date appointed for its first meeting [and no longer].
(2) An election to constitute a Municipality shall be completed:
(a) before the expiry of its duration specified in clause (1);
(b) before the expiration of a period of six months from the
date of its dissolution:
Provided that if the Legislature of the State passes a
resolution to the effect that due to drought, flood,
earthquake or any other natural calamity or emergency,
the election cannot be held within the period specified in
sub-clause (b), the said election shall be completed within
a period of one year from the date of dissolution of the
Municipality.
527
528
282
Article 234V
On the recommendations of the Joint Committee, the existing article
243V (re-numbered as 243W) was replaced by a new one dealing with
disqualifications for membership of a Municipality, on the lines of those
in article 243F.
529
Ibid.
283
Article 243Y
This article originally did not figure in the Bill when introduced in
the Lok Sabha. The Joint Committee, while examining the Bill,
recommended that article 243-I of Part IX dealing with constitution of
Finance Commission to review financial position should be incorporated
as article 243Y with suitable modifications as to substitute the expression
Panchayat by Municipality.
With the said changes, article 243Y as recommended by the Joint
Committee read:
243Y (1) The Governor of the State shall as soon as may be within
one year from the commencement of the Constitution (Seventythird Amendment) Act, 1992 and thereafter at the expiration of
every fifth year constitute a Finance Commission to review the
financial position of the Municipalities and to make
recommendations to the Governor as to:
(a) the principles which should govern:
(i) the distribution between the State and the Municipalities of
the net proceeds of the taxes, duties, tolls and fees leviable by
530
531
532
284
the State, which may be divided between them under this Part
and the allocation between the Municipalities at all levels of
their respective shares of such proceeds;
(ii) the determination of the taxes, tolls and fees which may be
assigned to, or appropriated by the Municipalities;
(iii) the grants-in-aid to the Municipalities from the Consolidated
Fund of the State;
(b) the measures needed to improve the financial position of the
Municipalities;
(c) the extent to which the Consolidated Fund of the State needs
to be augmented by the assistance from the Government of India
to supplement the resources of the Municipalities;
(d) any other matter referred to the Finance Commission by the
Governor in the interests of sound finance of the Municipalities.
(2) The Legislature of a State may, by law, provide for the
composition of the Commission, the qualifications which shall be
requisite for appointment as members thereof and the manner in which
they shall be selected.
(3) The Commission shall determine their procedure and shall have
such powers in the performance of their functions as the Legislature of
the State may, by law, confer on them.
(4) The Governor shall cause every recommendation made by the
Commission under this article together with an explanatory
memorandum as to the action taken thereon, to be laid before the
Legislature of the State.
During consideration of the Bill, the Minister of Urban
Development, Smt. Sheila Kaul, moved few amendments to
article 243Y. These amendments, inter alia, sought to substitute opening
words of clause (1) of article 243Y so as to substitute that the Finance
Commission constituted under article 243-I shall also review the
financial position of the Municipalities and make recommendations to
the Governor. Further amendments suggested omission of sub-clause (c)
of clause (1) of article 243Y, re-numbering of clause (d) as clause (c),
omission of clauses (2) and (3) and re-numbering of clause (4) as
clause (2).
285
All these amendments were accepted by the Lok Sabha. With these
changes, article 243Y was adopted by the Lok Sabha and the
Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992, respectively533.
Article 243Z
Article 243U of the Bill, as introduced, was re-numbered as
article 243Z by the Joint Committee without any further changes.
However, when this article came up for consideration in the Lok Sabha,
an amendment was moved by the Minister of Urban Development to
substitute the article by a new one providing as follows:
243Z. The Legislature of a State may, by law, make provision with
respect to the maintenance of accounts by the Municipalities and
the auditing of such accounts.
The article, in its amended form, was adopted by the Lok Sabha
and the Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992, respectively534.
Article 243ZA
The clause as introduced vide article 243T provided that provision
of article 243K of Part IX relating to election of Panchayats shall apply
in relation to Municipalities also.
The Joint Committee recommended that it should be left to the
Legislature of a State to make provisions with respect to all matters
relating to the elections to the Municipalities. No other change was
recommended during the consideration of this article in the Lok Sabha,
the Minister of Urban Development, Smt. Sheila Kaul moved an
amendment to insert a new clause (1) to the article which specifically
provides that the superintendence, duration and control of the
preparation of electoral roll for and the conduct of, all elections to the
Municipalities shall be vested in the State Election Commission referred
to in article 243K. Further, clause (1) was re-numbered as clause (2).
Article 243ZA, as amended, was adopted by the Lok Sabha on
22 December 1992535 and by the Rajya Sabha on 23 December 1992536.
533
534
535
536
Ibid.
Ibid.
L.S. Deb., 22 December 1992, c. 837.
R.S. Deb., 23 December 1992, c. 221.
286
Article 243ZB
The Joint Committee had recommended that the provision to
article 243L of Part IX in respect of its application to Union territories
shall apply to this Bill also. However, the President should only have
the power to apply the said provisions to any Union territory. The Joint
Committee, accordingly, recommended insertion of a new clause ZB
in article 243.
This clause, alongwith other new clauses ZC, ZD, ZE, ZF and ZG
was adopted by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 22 and
23 December537 1992, respectively.
Article 243ZC
Article 243W of the Bill as introduced, specifying Scheduled Areas
wherein Part IXA shall not apply, was re-numbered by the Joint
Committee as 243ZC. The Committee further suggested that this power
of Parliament to extend the provision of Part IX A to the Scheduled
Areas and the tribal areas should be exercised only if the Legislature
of the State concerned passes a resolution to that effect. However, at
the consideration stage, this recommendation was omitted by an
amendment. By another amendment, a new sub-clause (2) was inserted
which reads as:
243ZC. (2) Nothing in this part shall be construed to affect the
functions and powers of the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council
constituted under any law for the time being in force for the hill
areas of the district of Darjeeling in the State of West Bengal.
Also, clause (2) was re-numbered as clause (3). All these
amendments moved by the Minister of Urban Development, Smt. Sheila
Kaul were accepted by the House and the clause ZC was adopted in
the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992,
respectively538.
Article 243ZD
Originally when the Bill was introduced, this article, dealing with
Committee for district planning, was not there. The Joint Committee
537
538
L.S. Deb., 22 December 1992, c. 837; R.S. Deb., 23 December 1992, c. 221.
Ibid.
287
while examining the Bill felt that there was a need to take an overall
view in regard to development of the district as a whole and decide an
allocation of investment between rural and urban institutions. The
Committee, therefore, recommended that there should be a provision
for constitution of a District Planning Committee in every State at the
district level with a view to consolidating the plans prepared by the
Panchayats and the Municipalities in the district as a whole. In order
to impart a democratic character to such Committee, not less than fourfifth of the total number of member of these Committees should be
elected members of the Panchayat at the district level and of the
Municipalities in the district in proportion to the ratio between the
population of the rural areas and of the urban areas in the district. The
other details relating to composition of the said Committee, the manner
of filling the seats therein, the functions relating to district planning to
be assigned to such Committee and the manner in which the Chairperson
of such Committee shall be chosen, may be left to the State Legislature.
The District Planning Committee, in preparing the draft development
plan, should have regard to matters of common interest between the
Panchayats and the Municipalities including spatial planning; sharing
of water and other physical and natural resources; the integrated
development of infrastructure and environmental conservation; the
extent and type of available resources. Whether financial or otherwise,
while preparing such draft development plan, the said Committee should
also consult such institutions and organisations as the State Governments
may specify. The draft development plan so prepared shall be forwarded
to the State Government concerned by the Chairperson of the
Committee. Article 243ZD was thus inserted accordingly.
The article, as recommended by the Committee, was adopted by
the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on 22 and 23 December 1992,
respectively539.
Article 243ZE
Like article 243ZD, this article dealing with constitution of
Committee for Metropolitan planning also did not figure in the original
Bill. Later the Joint Committee in its Report observed that there are
539
Ibid.
288
Ibid.
289
Other Amendments
Clause 3 of the Bill was re-numbered as clause 4 by the Joint
Committee and an amendment was suggested in item 8 of the Twelfth
Schedule to include subjects relating to protection of environment,
public amenities, including street lighting, parking lots, bus stops, public
conveniences, regulation of slaughter houses and tanneries. The Twelfth
Schedule was amended accordingly. Clause 4, as amended by the Joint
Committee, was adopted by the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on
22 and 23 December 1992, respectively543.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha on 22 December
1992544 with a formal amendment replacing the word Seventy-third
541
542
543
544
L.S.
R.S.
L.S.
L.S.
Deb.,
Deb.,
Deb.,
Deb.,
22
23
22
22
December
December
December
December
1992,
1992,
1992,
1992,
c.
c.
c.
c.
855.
222.
871; R.S. Deb., 23 December 1992, c. 225.
887.
290
291
292
293
to such conditions and limits; provide for such grants-in-aid from the
Consolidated Fund of the State; provide for constitution of Funds for
crediting and withdrawal of monies as may be specified in the law.
Article 243Y provides that the Finance Commission constituted
under article 243-I shall also review the financial position of the
Municipalities and make recommendations to the Governor as to the
principles which should govern the financial relations between the
State and Municipalities as specified therein and the measures needed
to improve the financial position of the Municipalities. The Governor
shall cause every recommendation together with an explanatory
memorandum as to the action taken thereon, to be laid before the
Legislature of the State.
Under article 243Z, the provisions for maintenance and audit of
accounts of Municipalities may be made by the State Legislature.
Article 243ZA provides that the superintendence, direction and
control of the preparation of electoral rolls for and the conduct of, all
elections to the Municipalities shall be vested in the State Election
Commission. The Legislature of a State, however, is empowered to
make provisions in respect of all matter relating to elections.
The provisions of Part IXA shall apply to Union territories provided
that the President may, by public notification, direct such application
with some exceptions and modifications. However, the provisions of
Part IXA shall not be applicable to the Scheduled Areas referred to in
clause (1) and the tribal areas referred to in clause (2) of article 244
unless the Parliament makes law to that effect and also shall not affect
the functions and powers of the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council.
The Act provides for the constitution of a District Planning
Committee at the district level to consolidate the plans prepared by the
Panchayats and the Municipalities and to prepare a draft development
plan for the district as a whole. The Legislature of a State shall be
empowered to make provision for the composition and functions of the
Committee, etc. Similarly in every Metropolitan area, a Metropolitan
Planning Committee shall be constituted to prepare a draft development
plan for the Metropolitan area as a whole. The Legislature of a State
is empowered to make provision with regard to the composition of
Committee, etc.
294
LXXV
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1994546
295
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-fifth Amendment) Act, 1994, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 14 July 1992, was titled as the
Constitution (Seventy-seventh Amendment) Bill, 1992547. The Bill
sought to amend article 323B of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 24 and 25 August
1993 and, as amended, was passed on the same day548. The Bill, as
passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the
Rajya Sabha on 26 August 1993549.
Clause 1 of the Bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha with a formal
amendment replacing the word Seventy-seventh by the word
Seventy-fifth. Clause 1, as amended by the Lok Sabha, was adopted
by the Rajya Sabha on 26 August 1993550.
296
LXXVI
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1994551
297
298
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-sixth Amendment) Act, 1994, when
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 24 August 1994, was titled as the
Constitution (Eighty-fifth Amendment) Bill, 1994552. The Bill sought
to amend the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 24 August 1994
and passed on the same day553 with a formal amendment554 changing
the short title of the Constitution (Seventy-sixth Amendment) Act, 1994.
The Bill, as passed by the Rajya Sabha, was considered and passed by
the Lok Sabha on 25 August 1994555.
552
553
554
555
299
LXXVII
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1995556
300
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-seventh Amendment) Act, 1995, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 31 May 1995, was titled as the
Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1995557. The Bill sought
to amend article 16 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 2 June 1995 and
passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the short
title from Eighty-sixth to Seventy-seventh358. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
2 June 1995559.
LXXVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1995560
301
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-eighth Amendment) Act, 1995, when
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 19 April 1994, was titled as the
Constitution (Eighty-first Amendment) Bill, 1994561. It sought to amend
the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution. The Bill was referred to the
Standing Committee on Urban and Rural Development. The Committee
presented its Report to the Lok Sabha and laid it on the table of the
Rajya Sabha on 15 December 1994. The Committee approved the Bill
without any recommendation for amendments.
The Bill was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 22 August 1995
and passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the
561
302
LXXIX
THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 1999566
303
Legislative History
The Constitution (Seventy-ninth Amendment) Act, 1999, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 26 October 1999, was titled as
Constitution (Eighty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1999567. The Bill sought
to amend article 334 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by Lok Sabha on 27 October 1999 and
passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the short
title from Eighty-fourth to Seventh-ninth568. The Bill, as passed by
the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
28 October 1999569.
304
LXXX
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2000570
305
306
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eightieth Amendment) Act, 2000, when introduced
in Lok Sabha on 9 March, 2000, was titled as the Constitution (Eighty-
307
308
Article 270 has been substituted with a new article with effect from
1 April 1996. It provides that all taxes and duties referred to in the
Union List, except the duties and taxes referred to in articles 268
and 269, respectively, surcharge on taxes and duties referred to in
article 271 and any cess levied for specific purposes under any law
made by Parliament shall be levied and collected by the Government
of India and shall be distributed between the Union and the States as
specified therein. Such percentage, as may be prescribed, of the net
proceeds of any such tax or duty in any financial year shall not form
part of the Consolidated Fund of India, but shall be assigned to the
States within which that tax or duty is leviable in that year, and shall
be distributed among those States in such manner and from such time
as may be prescribed in the manner as provided for in clause (3). In
this article, prescribed means: (i) until a Finance Commission has
been constituted, prescribed by the President by order, and (ii) after a
Finance Commission has been constituted, prescribed by the President
by order after considering the recommendations of the Finance
Commission. (Section 3)
Article 272 of the Constitution, which deals with taxes to be levied
and collected by the Union and to be distributed between the Union
and the States, has been omitted. Notwithstanding such omission, where
any sum equivalent to the whole or any part of the net proceeds of the
Union duties of excise including additional duties of excise which are
levied and collected by the Government of India and which has been
distributed as grants-in-aid to the States after 1 April 1996, but before
the commencement of this Act, such sum shall be deemed to have been
distributed in accordance with the provisions of article 270, as if
article 272 had been omitted with effect from 1 April 1996. Further,
any sum equivalent to the whole or any part of the net proceeds of any
other tax or duty that has been distributed as grants-in-aid to the States
after 1 April 1996 but before the commencement of this Act, shall be
deemed to have been distributed in accordance with the provisions of
article 270. (Section 4)
309
LXXXI
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2000574
310
accordance with any provision for reservation made under clause (4)
of clause (4A) of article 16 of the Constitution, shall be considered as
a separate class of vacancies to be filled up in any succeeding year or
years and such class of vacancies shall not be considered together with
the vacancies of the year in which they are being filled up for
determining the ceiling of fifty per cent reservation on total number of
vacancies of that year. This amendment in the Constitution would
enable the State to restore the position as was prevalent before
29 August 1997.
That Bill sought to achieve the aforesaid object.
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-first Amendment) Act, 2000, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 8 May 2000, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninetieth Amendment) Bill, 2000575. The Bill sought to
amend article 16 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 9 May 2000576 and
passed on 10 May 2000 with a formal amendment changing the short
title from Ninetieth to Eighty-first577. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 16 May
2000578.
311
LXXXII
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2000579
312
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-second Amendment) Act, 2000, when
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 23 December 1999, was titled as the
Constitution (Eighty-eighth Amendment) Bill, 1999580. It sought to
amend article 335. The Bill was referred to the Standing Committee on
Home Affairs. The Committee presented its Report to the Rajya Sabha
and laid it on the table of the Lok Sabha on 28 July 2000. The
Committee recommended that the Bill be passed in the present form.
Thereafter, the Bill was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 17 August
2000 and passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing
the short title from Eighty-eighth to Eighty-second581. The Bill, as
passed by the Rajya Sabha, was considered and passed by the
Lok Sabha on 22 August 2000582.
580
581
582
313
LXXXIII
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2000583
314
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-third Amendment) Act, 2000, when
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 17 December 1999, was titled as the
Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Bill, 1999584. The Bill sought
to amend article 243M of the Constitution. The Bill, as introduced,
was referred to the Standing Committee on Urban and Rural
Development. The Committee presented its Report to the Lok Sabha
and laid it on the table of the Rajya Sabha on 26 July 2000. The
Committee endorsed the said Bill and recommended that Parliament
may consider to pass the Bill at the earliest so that the Panchayati Raj
system in Arunachal Pradesh could be started as quickly as possible.
The Bill was considered by the Rajya Sabha on 21 December
1999585 and passed on 17 August 2000 with a formal amendment
changing the title from Eighty-sixth to Eighty-third586. The Bill, as
passed by the Rajya Sabha, was considered and passed by the
Lok Sabha on 22 August 2000587.
315
LXXXIV
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2001588
316
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-fourth Amendment) Act, 2001, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27 November 2000, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninety-first Amendment) Bill, 2000589. It sought to amend
articles 55, 81, 82, 170, 330 and 332 of the Constitution. The Bill was
referred to the Standing Committee on Home Affairs. The Committee
presented its Report to the Rajya Sabha and laid it on the table of the
Lok Sabha on 26 April 2001. The Committee recommended that the
Bill be passed in the present form.
Thereafter, the Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 21 August
2001 and was passed on the same day with a formal amendment
changing the short title from Ninety-first to Eighty-fourth590. The
Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the
Rajya Sabha on 23 August 2001591.
317
LXXXV
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2001592
318
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-fifth Amendment) Act, 2001, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 26 November 2001, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninety-second Amendment) Bill, 2001593. The Bill sought
to amend article 16 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 28 November 2001
and passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the
short title from Ninety-second to Eighty-fifth594. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
5 December 2001595.
319
LXXXVI
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2002596
320
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 26 November 2001, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninety-third Amendment) Bill, 2001597. It sought to insert
a new article 21A in the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 28 November 2001
and passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the
short title from Ninety-third to Eighty-sixth598. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha with
amendments in clause 1(1) substituting the figure 2002 for 2001
and in the Enacting Formula substituting Fifty-third for Fifty-second
on 14 May 2002599. The Bill, as amended by the Rajya Sabha, was
agreed to and passed by the Lok Sabha on 27 November 2002600.
597
598
599
600
321
LXXXVII
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2003601
322
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-seventh Amendment) Act, 2003, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 2 May 2003, was titled as the
323
LXXXVIII
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2003605
324
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-eighth Amendment) Act, 2003, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 7 March 2003, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninety-fifth Amendment) Bill, 2003606. The Bill sought
to insert a new article 268A in the Constitution.
606
325
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 6 May 2003 and was
passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the short
title from Ninety-fifth to Eighty-eighth607. The Bill, as passed by
the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
8 May 2003608.
LXXXIX
THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY-NINTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2003609
326
Legislative History
The Constitution (Eighty-ninth Amendment) Act, 2003, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 20 December 2002, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninety-fourth Amendment) Bill, 2002610. The Bill sought
to amend article 338 of the Constitution. The Bill was referred to the
Standing Committee on Labour and Welfare. The Committee presented
its Report to the Lok Sabha and laid it on the table of Rajya Sabha on
11 March 2003. Thereafter the Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha
on 8 August 2003611. During the consideration of the Bill, accepting
610
611
327
Ibid., c. 324.
Ibid., c. 357.
R.S. Deb., 19 August 2003, pp. 207-263.
328
the President, annually and at such other times as the Commission may
deem fit, reports upon the working of those safeguards, etc.; to discharge
such other functions in relation to the protection, welfare and
development and advancement of the Scheduled Tribes as the President
may, by rule, specify. (Section 3)
The President shall cause all reports to be laid before each House
of Parliament. Among other things, the Commission shall while
investigating any matter referred to therein, have all the powers of a
Civil Court trying a suit. The Union and every State Government shall
consult the Commission on all major policy matters affecting the
Scheduled Tribes. (Section 3)
XC
THE CONSTITUTION (NINETIETH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2003615
329
Legislative History
The Constitution (Ninetieth Amendment) Act, 2003, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 9 May 2003, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninety-ninth Amendment) Bill, 2003616. It sought to
amend article 332 of the Constitution. The Bill was referred to the
Standing Committee on Home Affairs. The Committee presented its
Report to the Rajya Sabha and laid it on the table of the Lok Sabha
on 22 July 2003. The Committee recommended that the Bill be passed
in the original form.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 8 August 2003 and
passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the short
title from Ninety-ninth to Ninetieth617. Clause 2 of the Bill was
also substituted, on a motion moved by the Minister of State in the
Ministry of Home Affairs, Shri Swami Chinmayanand, replacing the
words the Bodoland Territorial Council Areas District by the words
the Bodoland Territorial Areas District at two places in the proposed
proviso to clause (6) of article 332618. The Bill, as passed by the
Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
19 August 2003619.
330
XCI
THE CONSTITUTION (NINETY-FIRST AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2003620
331
Legislative History
The Constitution (Ninety-first Amendment) Act, 2003, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 5 May 2003, was titled as the
Constitution (Ninety-seventh Amendment) Bill, 2003621. The Bill sought
to amend articles 75 and 164 and to insert a new article 361B in the
Constitution. The Bill was referred to the Standing Committee on Home
Affairs. The Committee presented its Report to the Rajya Sabha and
laid it on the table of the Lok Sabha on 5 December 2003. Thereafter,
the Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 16 December 2003622.
During consideration of the Bill, certain amendments including those
recommended by the Committee on Home Affairs, were moved by the
Minister of Law and Justice, Shri Arun Jaitley and adopted by the
House:
Article 75
Accepting the recommendation of the Standing Committee on Home
Affairs, the proposed new clause (1A) in article 75 was substituted to
621
622
332
replace the words ten per cent of the total number of members of both
House of Parliament by the words fifteen per cent of the total members
of the House of the People in connection with the ceiling on the
number of Ministers in the Council of Ministers at the Centre with a
view to ensure uniformity of law in the country.
Accepting the recommendation of the Standing Committee, the
proposed new clause (1B) in article 75 was also substituted.
Clause (1B), as introduced in the Lok Sabha, provided as follows:
A member of either House of Parliament belonging to any political
party who is disqualified for being member of that House under
Paragraph 2 of the Tenth Schedule shall also be disqualified to be
appointed as a Minister under clause (1) for duration of the period
commencing from the date of his disqualification till the date on
which the term of his office as such member would expire or till
the date on which he contests an election to any House of Parliament
or Legislature of a State, whichever is earlier.
The aforesaid clause was substituted so as to provide for the words
or where he contests any election to either House of Parliament before
the expiry of such period, till the date on which he is declared elected,
whichever is earlier in place of the words or till the date on which
he contests an election to any House of Parliament or Legislature of
a State, whichever is earlier623. This was done with a view to provide
that the disqualification on ground of defection as specified under
Paragraph 2 of Tenth Schedule shall be removed only when the member
wins an election to any House of Parliament.
Article 164
As recommended by the Standing Committee on Home Affairs, the
proposed new clause (1A) in article 164 in connection with the ceiling
on the number of Ministers in the Council of Ministers in a State was
substituted to replace the words, ten per cent of the total number of
members of the Legislative Assembly of that State or, in case of a
623
333
334
Article 361B
Accepting the recommendations of the Standing Committee on
Home Affairs, the proposed new article 361B was also substituted. The
said article, as introduced in the Lok Sabha, read as follows:
361B. A member of a House belonging to any political party who is
disqualified for being a member of the House under Paragraph 2 of
the Tenth Schedule shall also be disqualified to hold any
remunerative political post for duration of the period commencing
from the date of his disqualification till the date on which the term
of his office as such member would expire or till the date on which
he contests an election to a House, whichever is earlier.
The aforesaid article was substituted so as to replace the words
to a House, whichever is earlier by the words to a House and is
declared elected, whichever is earlier. This was done with a view to
provide that the disqualification on ground of defection as given under
Paragraph 2 of Tenth Schedule is removed only when he/she wins an
election to any House of Parliament or Legislature of a State.
Further, in the Explanation to article 361B, the expression
remunerative political post was added which reads as follows:
(b) The expression remunerative political post means any office:
(i) under the Government of India or the Government of a State
where the salary or remuneration for such office is paid out
624
335
336
337
XCII
THE CONSTITUTION (NINETY-SECOND AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2003628
Legislative History
The Constitution (Ninety-second Amendment) Act, 2003, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 18 August 2003, was titled as the
Constitution (One-hundredth Amendment) Bill, 2003629. The Bill sought
to amend the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution. The Bill, as
introduced, was referred to the Standing Committee on Home Affairs.
The Committee presented its Report to the Rajya Sabha and laid it on
the table of the Lok Sabha on 5 December 2003. The Committee
recommended that the Bill be passed in the present form.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 22 December 2003
and passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the
short title from One-hundredth to Ninety-second630. During the
consideration of the Bill, apart from Bodo language, it was accepted
by the Government631 to include three other languages, namely,
Santhali, Maithili and Dogri to the Eighth Schedule. An
amendment to that effect was moved by the Deputy Prime Minister,
628
629
630
631
338
Shri L.K. Advani and adopted by the House632. The newly substituted
section 2 now provided for inclusion of Bodo language as Entry
No. 3, Dogri as Entry No. 4, Maithili as Entry No. 10 and Santhali
as Entry No. 18 and also for consequential re-numbering of the existing
entries, accordingly. The Bill, as passed by the Lok Sabha, was
considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on 23 December 2003633.
XCIII
THE CONSTITUTION (NINETY-THIRD AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2005634
339
Legislative History
The Constitution (Ninety-third Amendment) Act, 2003, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 20 December 2005, was titled as the
Constitution (One hundred-fourth Amendment) Bill, 2005635. It sought
to amend article 15 of the Constitution.
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 21 December 2005
and passed on the same day with a formal amendment changing the
635
340
XCIV
THE CONSTITUTION (NINETY-FOURTH AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2006638
341
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Bihar
Jharkhand
Chhattisgarh
Madhya Pradesh
0.9
26.3
31.8
20.3
Legislative History
The Constitution (Ninety-fourth Amendment) Act, 2006, when
introduced in the Lok Sabha on 1 March 2006, was titled as the
Constitution (One hundred-fifth Amendment) Bill, 2006639. The Bill
sought to amend article 164 of the Constitution.
639
342
The Bill was considered by the Lok Sabha on 17 May 2006640 and
passed on 22 May 2006 with a formal amendment changing the short
title from One hundred-fifth to Ninety-fourth641. The Bill, as passed
by the Lok Sabha, was considered and passed by the Rajya Sabha on
22 May 2006642.
640
641
642